tilt 



Qass_BXl *7 5 3 
Book (1 



PRESENTED BY" 



PLAIN FACTS 

FOR 

FAIR MINDS 



AN APPEAL TO CANDOR 
AND COMMON SENSE 



BY 

GEORGE M.^SEARLE 

Priest of the Congregation of St. Paul the Apostle ; Professor of 
Mathematics and Astronotny in the Catholic University 
of America and Director of the Observatory 



New York 
THE CATHOLIC BOOK EXCHANGE 
1 20 West 60th Street 



fttbtl obstat : 

AUGUSTINUS P. HEW1T, S.T.D., 

Censor Deputatus. 



flmprlmatur : 

MICHAEL AUGUSTINUS, 

Archzep. Neo Ebor. 

xv Mart, iSpj. 



Copyright, 1895, by "The Missionary Society of 
St. Paul the Apostle in the State 
of New York." 



Fubl. 



Printed at the Columbus Press, 1£Q West 60th 



PREFACE. 



hpHIS book has been written, not with the 
A view of controversy, but of simply stat- 
ing the Catholic doctrine. In these days 
there seems little need of controversy on 
our part with the majority, at least, of 
Protestant Christians ; for their belief mainly 
consists of remnants of our own, and so far 
are we from objecting to it, that we thank 
God that they have preserved such impor- 
tant parts of His revelation as are the dog- 
mas of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the 
Redemption of man by the great Sacrifice 
of the Cross. Some tenets they have, no 
doubt, which we cannot approve, but these 
are generally regarded as non-essential, and 
are losing their hold even in the churches 
which nominally maintain them. What they 
prize, we also teach. m 

They, however, are not tired of contro- 
versy. The very essence of Protestantism is 
in protesting against the Catholic Church. 



fv 



Preface. 



In its beginning these protests were based 
on really divergent beliefs ; but now they 
are principally directed against what has no 
real existence. Those who make them are, 
for the most part, as we Catholics well 
know, simply fighting a man of straw ; a 
creature of their own imagination, and of the 
false traditions received from their ancestors. 
The only way in which their objections can 
be answered, except by such examples of vir- 
tue as we can show, is by plain statements 
of what our belief really is. If they can be 
induced to listen to us, and to believe that 
we actually teach and hold what we say we 
do, as every instinct of fairness and candor 
and honesty would compel them to do in 
any other question ; if they will take our doc- 
trine from our own account of it, not from 
those of others prejudiced like themselves, 
we need not fear the outcome. 

There seems at the present time to be a 
better disposition than formerly on the part 
of those outside to listen to our own state- 
ments about our faith, rather than to those 
coming from second-hand sources. What is 
said in these pages has, of course, been said 



Preface. 



v 



before ; but perhaps it may fall now on 
more willing ears and more candid minds. 

In these pages the truth of the Christian 
religion is practically assumed. This book 
is not intended to prove the existence of 
God, or the fact of a Divine revelation to 
the atheist, the agnostic, or the infideL 
Neither is it directed against such as may 
believe in some revelation additional or sup- 
plementary to that given to us by Christ ; 
nor does it deal with every theory regard- 
ing the Church which may be held — as, for 
example, that of the Anglicans. It is ad- 
dressed principally to what are commonly 
called Bible Christians, who form the major- 
ity of our Protestant population, in order to 
show them that the Catholic religion, while 
thoroughly in accordance with Scripture and 
based on it, also agrees with reason and 
common sense, and has nothing to fear 
from the discoveries or legitimate conclu- 
sions of science ; that having the historical 
presumption in its favor, it also in every 
other way satisfies the demands of the intel- 
lect, as well as the needs of the soul. And 
to show the reasonableness of what is really 



vi 



Preface. 



the only thoroughly reasonable form of 
Christianity may not be altogether unprofit- 
able even to others also, of whatever kind 
their belief or unbelief may be. 

It may be added, in further explanation 
of the plan of the work, that though, as 
has been said, it is not intended as an at- 
tack on distinctively Protestant doctrines, it 
has seemed best at the outset to compare 
the Catholic idea of Christianity with the 
usual Protestant theory basing religion on 
the Bible alone. The creed of the Catholic 
Church is then set forth point by point ; the 
order here followed is that of the profession 
of faith made by converts, each point of this 
profession being separately considered, and 
the common objections and misconceptions 
dealt with. In conclusion, other charges 
against the Church not suggested by the 
profession, but often made by those who do 
not know us, are discussed and shown also 
to rest on prejudice or misunderstanding. 



CONTENTS. 



Chapter Page 

I.— Introductory, i 

II. — Bible Protestantism, 16 

III. — The Catholic Idea of Christian- 

ity, 29 

IV. — The Infallibility of the Pope, . 36 
V. — The Catholic Idea of the Bible, 50 

VI. — The principal Points of Catholic 

Faith, 59 

VII. — The Blessed Virgin Mary, . . 74 
VIII. — The Immaculate Conception, c 82 
IX.— The Holy Eucharist, . . .87 
X. — The Seven Sacraments, . . .101 
XI. — Purgatory, 111 

XII. — The Resurrection of the Dead ; 

Everlasting Life, . . .132 

XIII. — The Primacy of the Roman Pon- 

tiff, . . .... 143 

XIV. — Catholic Education, . . .151 
XV. — The Veneration of the Saints, 

AND OF THEIR IMAGES, . . 162 

XVI. — The Remainder of the Profes- 
sion, 185 

XVIL. — The Precepts of the Church, . 198 



XVIII. — Indulgences and Dispensations, 221 

vii 



viii 



Contents. 



Chapter Page 

XIX. — Confession, 233 

XX. — The Celibacy of the Clergy, . 244 
XXL— Modern Miracles, . . .251 

XXII. — Superstition, 26B 

XXIII. — The Church opposed to Science, 274 

XXIV. — The Church opposed to Liberty 

of Thought, .... 285 

XXV. — The Catholic Church opposed 

to Free Institutions, . . 298 

XXVI. — Persecution, . . . . . 307 

XXVII. — The Catholic Laws of Marriage, 321 

XXVIII. — Use of the Latin Language, . 331 
XXIX. — Ceremonies and Rites of the 

Church, 338 

XXX. — The Good and the Bad in the . 

Church, 343 

XXXI.— Conclusion, * • t • « 352 



CHAPTER I. 



INTRODUCTORY. 

I ADDRESS these pages in general to those 
who love the truth, and who wish to know 
it ; more specially to those who believe, as com- 
mon sense must require us to believe, that the 
most important part of all truth is that which 
relates to man's duty here, and his destiny 
hereafter; but particularly to those who are 
convinced that this last, religious truth, or the 
true religion, is to be found somewhere or other 
in what is known as Christianity ; or in other 
words, that the religion founded by Christ con- 
tains all that man can know on these most im- 
portant matters. 

Some do not believe that anything can be 
known about these matters except what the light 
of nature shows us; with such, of course, dis- 
cussion is quite possible, but I do not propose to 
enter on it, ; Many others believe that the true, 
or at any rate the truest religion is not that of 
Christ, but some other; but though there are 
plenty of this sort in the world, there are not so 
many here ; few Americans are Mohammedans, 
or even Buddhists ; so I pass them by, and turn 



2 



Introductory. 



to the multitude, who still are, by inheritance 

and by profession, Christians, 

And yet, after all, considerations presented on 
this basis may not be altogether beside the 
mark for those who do not stand on it. For 
the reason why they refuse to stand on it may 
well be that the Christian creed seems to them 
unreasonable and impossible ; but that may be 
simply because their knowledge of it is very in- 
complete ; because they have known it as it has 
been handed down to them from their fathers, 
but not as it has been believed by the great 
majority of those who, from the time of Christ, 
have lived and died in it. 

It may be well, then, even for those who have 
rejected Christianity, as they have understood 
it, to examine if they have been right or 
thoroughly reasonable in so doing. 

Would it be reasonable or fair to reject the 
whole science of medicine because you have 
concluded that some form of it which you have 
studied is a mistake ? Let us, then, not reject 
Christianity for good and all' until we are sure 
we know all about it ; and certainly not if we 
are quite ignorant or doubtful about what the 
great mass of Christians hold. 

There are vast numbers — you are perhaps one 
yourself — who are in just this ignorance or 
doubt. It is simply astonishing that there 
should be two hundred millions of people hold- 



Introductory. 



3 



ing one faith, and spread through all parts of 
the world, and yet that their neighbors, friends, 
or even relatives, with whom so much of their 
life is spent, should be in such ignorance of 
what that faith is, or have such false ideas 
about it. Especially as these two hundred 
millions do not form a secret society, with secret 
meetings, signs, and passwords ; no, everything 
that they hold and teach is open and above- 
board ; they are not Freemasons, they are simply 
Catholics. 

It was so, however, from the beginning; we 
were accused of worshipping an ass's head, and 
of slaughtering infants ; but then there was 
more excuse for such calumnies, for there was, 
there had to be, some secrecy in our meetings 
then ; but now there is very little ; every one is 
welcome to every religious meeting of Catho- 
lics, except to that between priest and penitent 
in the confessional ; you yourself would not 
want strangers, or indeed any third party, at 
that. 

But I do not wish to blame any one for being 
thus ignorant, if he will only admit that perhaps 
he is so ; for I should have to blame myself ; 
having been once as ignorant myself, and yet 
fancying I knew it all. But that was some time 
ago. 

Well now, we will come back to the line on 



4 



Introductory, 



which we started. We will suppose that you 
are a Christian, or at least would like to be so 
if you could see your way to it without giving 
up 3^our reason or your moral sense, or going 
through some great excitement, which you feel 
you cannot work yourself up to. 

And here let me say a word to dispel a de- 
lusion which has become quite popular of late. 
It is that religion is a matter of emotion or ex- 
citement ; that there is some incompatibility 
between it and strict logic ; that a religious man, 
and especially a clergyman, must be a man of 
feeling, rather than of solid hard-headed fact. 
That religion, in short, is a sentiment rather 
than a science ; that it is fit for women and 
children, and does them a great deal of good ; 
and would no doubt do a man good too, if he 
could only bend his gigantic intellect to it. 

Now, this idea would be simply amusing to 
any one who knows anything about the Catholic 
religion, if it were not a dangerous one, and 
therefore liable to make one sigh as well as 
smile. In the first place, the part of it relating 
to women is rather a bold assumption which 
perhaps we cannot hold to much longer ; I have 
a suspicion that perhaps women have more 
sense than some men imagine, and that we had 
better not be too confident that we are so much 
more clever than they, even in an argument. 

But let that go. The amusing part is the 



Introductory, 



5 



utter misconception of what religion really is. 
True, it is a matter of emotion ; and of senti- 
ment, if you choose to call it so. And it would 
not be good for anything if it were not. A 
religion which was simply a set of mathematical 
formulas might appeal to a man's brain, but it 
would not change his life. 
' But the emotion of true religion must rest on 
a solid basis of truth, fact, and reason. The 
true religion, at bottom, is not imagination, but 
knowledge ; and knowledge, not of one fact or 
another, isolated or disjointed, but logically 
connected and thoroughly consistent ; with no 
paradoxes or absurdities in it; knowledge, in 
short, of the kind that is properly called science. 
It is as truly a science as any one of the ex- 
cellent branches of knowledge which are so 
named ; different, however, to some extent from 
most of them in the way it is developed ; and 
from all of them, in being of all the most impor- 
tant. 

If you ask seriously, why, if this is the case, 
women and children take more to religion than 
men ? — I am afraid the true reason is that re- 
ligion has rather an intimate connection with 
morality, and that women and children, as 
things are now, take more kindly to that. A 
life of solid virtue is the best preparation for 
religious truth ; but still, eve^ one can receive 
it, if only he will ; and a man if he is virtuous, 



6 



Introductory. 



is apt to be very solidly so. Virtue, by the 
way, really means, in the Latin from which it 
is taken, manliness ; it would be well for all 
men to think of that, 

Try, then, to free yourself from this idea, 
rather prevalent at present, that reason and 
religion do not go together ; or what comes to 
about the same thing, that they are two separate 
apartments of the mind, and that you must step 
out of one before going into the other. Indeed, 
is this idea, in itself, reasonable ? You know 
that both reason and religion are worth having ; 
indeed the first is obviously indispensable, and 
the second, }~ou must at least acknowledge, has 
done and is doing a great deal of good, and you 
cannot shake off the respect you have for it 
when it seems to be genuine. You feel that at 
any rate there is some truth about it ; and if 
you would think a little harder, you would see 
that what there is true about it cannot be incon- 
sistent with reason, for two truths cannot be in- 
consistent. It cannot be necessary to abandon 
one before taking up the other. 

I say, 3'ou feel that there must be some truth 
about religion ; and I use the word 1 ' truth ' ' in 
its strict sense, as meaning a correct statement 
of facts. Perhaps . you deny this. But you 
must at least admit that every religion rests on 
some statements which it holds to be true ; 
some dogmas, as such statements in the matter 



Introductory* - 7 

of religion are properly called. It is merely 
nonsense to talk about a religion without any 
dogmas. The very emotion which you perhaps 
think the principal part of religion must rest on 
them. One can't get excited or deeply moved 
about nothing. Even a lunatic is joyful or 
melancholy about something ; something which 
he thinks is a fact, though we may see clearly 
that he is all wrong about it. 

Take away the dogmas of any religion, and 
there is nothing left of it. Excitement and 
emotion may be all very well ; but there must 
be something to get excited and emotional 
about. 

Excitement and emotion, then, rest on some 
supposed fact. I said just now that they may 
be all very well; but they are not very well, 
indeed, they are not well at all in the long run, 
if the supposed fact is only a supposed one. 
They are really only a sort of lunacy, and more 
or less dangerous. 

You have no respect for lunacy, but you have 
for the Christian religion ; and generally speak- 
ing, you do not regard it as dangerous, but 
rather good for society. You are a Christian, 
or you would like to be so if you could see your 
way to it ; but surely you do not call yourself 
a lunatic, or want to be one. 

What is the reason? It is that you have 
sense enough to see not only that the emotion 



8 



Introductory. 



of the Christian religion, which you know tends 
to virtue and happiness, and which you your- 
self may have felt, must and does rest on some 
fact or facts supposed to be true, but also that 
you are pretty sure that this supposition is not 
altogether wrong. 

Here you are, then, right face to face with a 
question which you ought not to trifle with. 
Five minutes' thought will bring you, and 
must, it would seem, bring any man of ordin- 
arily clear head, up to it. But most men seem 
to go no farther. 

The question is, how much of the Christian 
religion is true ? Some of it must be true ; but 
how much ? Some of its dogmas must be cor- 
rect ; which are they ? 

Mind, as I said at the beginning, I am not 
talking to Buddhists or Mohammedans; nor to 
absolute atheists, if such persons there be, nor 
to universal sceptics ; but to those who call 
themselves Christians, or would like to do so. 

Now, if the Christian religion, or anything 
calling itself so, undertakes to teach you that two 
and two make five, of course you can't accept 
that. We can't dethrone reason to make way 
for religion, or for anything else. Or if it 
should teach }^ou that the world was made in 
six days of twenty-four hours each, I can cer- 
tainly see that you may find that quite hard to 
believe. Of course that might be so; I take 



Introductory. 



9 



for granted that you believe in God, and if you 
do believe in Him, and therefore in His omni- 
potence, you must see that He could make all 
these formations on the earth, which seem to 
have been the growth of time, in six days, or in 
six minutes, or in six seconds ; but still, such 
action on His part would seem like a trick 
played to deceive us, and I can readily see how 
you would rather look somewhere else for the 
truth. 

Now, perhaps you think that the Christian 
religion does require beliefs of you which are 
contrary to reason, or to well-ascertained fact. 
But if you d<j, this is just where I blame you. 
Why don't you examine a little or even a good 
deal more, and not conclude that you know all 
about it ? 

But you say, where shall I examine? where 
shall I begin ? The Christian religion is split 
up into so many denominations, and teaches so 
many different things, even irreconcilable with 
each other, that I don't know what I am to look 
at first. 

Well, of course if you have been brought up 
in any particular one of these denominations, it 
is quite natural that you should examine first 
into that. But if you have done so, and have 
found the result unsatisfactory ; or if you want 
to approach the subject, as it were, from the out* 



IO 



Introductory. 



side, it seems more natural that you should now 
look first at what the majority of Christians 
hold ; at any rate, that you should not make up 
your mind without doing this ; that you should 
not, as I said at the start, close the subject 
because you cannot accept w r hat some compara- 
tively small number believe, and conclude that 
the faith of the great remainder is substantially 
the same, or, at any rate, equally untenable. 

It seems natural, too, to look, and to look first, 
into the belief of that great body of believers 
which has, in its organization and outward form 
at least, come down from the first days of the 
Christian religion itself; which goes by the 
name of no human founder or reformer. Of 
course this great body, this parent stock of 
Christianity, may have corrupted or changed the 
faith which Christ gave it in the beginning ; 
may have introduced something false or im- 
moral, or at any rate merely human, into that 
faith ; may have usurped powers which do not 
belong to it ; may have done something, in 
short, which it was right to protest against, and 
have acted in such a way that the only effectual 
protest was to abandon it, ajid start in a manner 
afresh. But it is not reasonable to take for 
granted that it did so. The burden of proof 
rather rests on those who claim that such was 
the case. 

&nd it is not quite fair to take their own 



Introductory, 



ii 



accounts of the reasons which led them to separ- 
ate ; of the doctrines which the Catholic Church 
taught, and still teaches, which they say they 
could not swallow. Better and fairer to find 
out if they might not have been mistaken, to 
say the least. When a son leaves his father's 
house after some quarrel, you don't simply take 
his word about the quarrel ; it is only fair to 
see what account the father will give of it. In- 
deed, generally the presumption is in his favor. 

Do not, then, believe implicitly all that you 
have been accustomed to hear about the corrup- 
tions, errors, idolatries, etc., of the old and 
original Christian Church. I do not blame you 
much if you have done so hitherto ; the false, 
and to Catholics really absurd, current notions 
about our faith have been held and circulated 
so constantly among Protestants that it can 
hardly be a matter of surprise that most non- 
Catholics take them for granted. 

All I ask of you is to admit that the question 
may have two sides to it. The difficulty is that 
most Englishmen and Americans, in making up 
their minds as to whether they can be Chris- 
tians, bar off the Catholic Church at the start 
from their inquiry. They take for granted that 
she is wrong ; they feel as sure of this as they 
do that the earth goes round the sun, not the 
sun round the earth. They think both these 



12 



Introductory. 



matters were settled three hundred years 
ago. 

"What!" they will say, ' 'be a Catholic? 
Why, you might as well go in for astrology, or 
hold that everything is made up of the four ele- 
ments, earth, air, fire, and water. Why, the 
thing is exploded ; it is a relic of the dark ages ; 
it is just a superstition which no intelligent man 
can hang on to. It is a wonder that it has such 
a hold in this glorious nineteenth (and almost 
twentieth) century." 

All they will admit is, that this superstition 
may be of some use to poor ignorant people, 
who are too brutish or stupid to accept anything 
better; the consolation they give themselves 
when some friend of theirs does embrace this 
old and foolish religion, and perhaps even be- 
comes a priest, to teach it to others, is, " Well, 
after all, you will be able to do some good to 
those poor people whom we cannot get hold 
of." 

How often do we hear such things said, even 
to our face ! But in spite of this seeming confi- 
dence of superiority, there is one thing that 
surprises them, and that they do not like to 
talk about ; and that is, that it is rather the 
educated and intelligent ones among them that 
become Catholics, whereas it is among the 
poorer and more ignorant among us that they 
find ones of whom they get hold It looks as if 



Introductory. 



13 



the Catholic faith were more attractive to in- 
telligent people than the Protestant one ; 01 
rather, it would look so if that were not, of 
course, too impossible an idea to be entertained. 

Another thing, too, seems a little strange : that 
some inducement in the way of material aid or 
social position seems usually required to make a 
Catholic abandon his faith ; whereas the Protes- 
tant who becomes a Catholic has, as a rule, 
to sacrifice something for his convictions. It 
looks, you see, as if the convictions were 
stronger one way than the other . 

Of course it may be said in explanation of the 
first of these two curious facts, by those who are 
willing to admit them as facts, that the intel- 
ligent Protestants who become Catholics are 
what are known at the present day as ' 1 cranks ' ' ; 
that they are not people of plain common sense, 
but students who have puzzled themselves by 
reasoning, or fanciful persons whose imagina- 
tion has been excited. This was what Festus 
said to St. Paul (Acts xxvi. 24) : " Paul, thou 
art beside thyself ; much learning doth make 
thee mad." Paul, however, has generally been 
accepted, even by those who are not Christians, 
as a man of good sound intellect, to say the 
least. And converts to Catholicity generally, 
even in our times, manage to keep out of the 
asylum, in spite of their friends , predictions to 
the contrary. 



14 



Introductory. 



To the second, it will be urged that Catho- 
lics must gain and Protestants lose by a 
change, because Protestants are as a whole bet- 
ter off, financially and socially, than Catholics. 
This is true ; but still it does not explain why 
the convert to the Catholic Church should make 
the sacrifice which he does, or why Protestants, 
having presumably the truth, and certainly the 
money in their possession, should have such 
unsatisfactory results in their apostolate among 
well-instructed Catholics. 

Now, all I would ask is that you would, just 
for a moment, admit that there may be some 
good solid reasons which have influenced the 
many quite intellectual and sensible Protes- 
tants who have become Catholics to make the 
change, in spite of the sacrifice which it in- 
volved. 

And I may add, that it may be worth while 
even for those who have almost lost faith in 
Christianity, as being out of harmony with rea- 
son, to see if there is not a chance that some- 
thing still remains to be said on the other side ; 
to inquire, before giving up altogether, whether 
there be not a form of Christianity about which 
they know little or nothing, though they have 
always supposed it to be quite irrational and 
inadmissible, which after all may be not only 
reasonable in itself, but also in accordance with 



Introductory. 



15 



all the progress of the age, and all the discover- 
ies of modern science. 

It is to this form of Christianity, accepted as 
the true one by the great mass of those who call 
themselves Christians, and understood well by 
them, though a mystery to you, that I propose 
very shortly to invite your attention. L,et us 
not only admit that it may be true, but see 
just what it is, and if there is any good reason 
why it should not be true. 

But first let us find out what is the inherent 
weakness of the Christian systems to which you 
have been accustomed ; why it is that they can- 
not reasonably command your assent, as being 
based on an unreasonable assumption. 



CHAPTER II. 



BIBLE PROTESTANTISM. 

WHAT is the assumption of which I have 
just spoken, which I say is the cause 
of the weakness of Christianity as generally 
understood by Englishmen and Americans, and 
which to some extent justifies them in thinking, 
as I have said many do think, that religion is a 
matter of the heart, not of the head ; that it 
commends itself to our sentiments, but not to 
our rational nature ? 

It is that the Bible is the sole foundation on 
which the Christian religion must rest ; not only 
that it is the Word of God, from Genesis to 
Revelation, but that nothing else is the word 
of God. 

Before proceeding farther, I would ask you to 
observe the precise point here noted. It is not 
that the Bible is an inspired book, and the only 
inspired book recognized by Christians ; for in 
that the Catholic Church agrees with Protes- 
tants, except that she recognizes as belonging 
to the Bible a few books which are also known 
and read by Protestants, which though some- 
times given in their Bibles, and used by them in 
their churches, are considered of doubtful or of 

16 



Bible Protestantism. 



*7 



merely human authority. So we cannot com- 
plain of their considering the Bible as God's 
Word ; for all that they recognize as such, we 
also recognize in like manner. 

It is true that there is a certain unreasonable- 
ness, which I vshall speak of shortly, in Protes- 
tants maintaining that just these writings are 
inspired which they have selected for their 
Bible ; in their feeling sure that every one of 
them is inspired from beginning to end, and 
that no other writing is. Catholics have a rea- 
son for confidence in their Bible, as will appear 
later on ; but Protestants have none except the 
general acceptance of these writings by Chris- 
tians, unless they fall back on the proof which, 
we employ ; but to do so would remove the 
whole basis of Protestantism itself, as will be 
seen when we come to speak of that proof. 

But still belief in the Bible is not in itself a 
fault in Protestants ; on the contrary, though it 
is somewhat illogical in them, we should and do 
thank God that they have retained it ; and we 
wish it to be distinctly understood that Catho- 
lics have the same belief in and reverence for it 
that they have, and even more, as based on*a 
more sufficient reason. We, even more than 
they, regard it as the Word of God, inspired by 
Him, and of conclusive authority in matters of 
religion. Our sermons, like those of Protes- 
tants, are founded, as a rule, on its text, and de 



i8 



Bible Protestantism. 



voted to an explanation of its meaning. Out 
people are recommended to read it with the 
reverent and careful attention which so holy a 
book requires and deserves. 

That the Bible is, then, a foundation, and a 
great and certain foundation, of the Christian 
religion is not the assumption which is the prin- 
cipal weakness of Protestantism; though in a 
sense, as being with them an unreasonable 
assumption, it is a weakness too. But after all, 
a belief, even though not well or logically 
established in a man's mind, is good if it be 
really true ; nothing false or ruinous is going to 
come from it ; on the other h^nd, it has in itself 
the germs of strength and liie. 

This, then, is not the dangerous assumption 
which has split Protestantism into so many 
sects, and made it incapable of commanding the 
rational assent of man. It is not the belief that 
the Bible is a sure foundation for the Christian 
religion that has done the harm ; no, it is the 
belief that it is its sole foundation. 

This belief is absolutely unreasonable ; for it 
is either demonstrably false, or destructive of 
Christianity itself. Taken in the sense that it 
is the only foundation Christianity ever had, it 
is clearly false. In the sense that it is the only 
one now remaining, the foundation it gives is ob- 
viously inadequate ; Christianity becomes some- 
thing which once existed, but which has passed 



Bible Protestantism. 



*9 



into oblivion ; it is as hopeless for us to acquire 
a sufficient knowledge of it as it would be to 
know thoroughly the manners and customs of 
the ancient Assyrians. We cannot tell whether 
some parts of our religion have not perished, 
quite as important and essential as those which 
the Bible contains. Practically, then, it is de- 
stroyed ; it exists simply as a wreck. 

Let us examine these two statements, and see 
if they are not correct. The first one is, that the 
Bible cannot have been the only foundation that 
ever existed for Christianity. 

This is, we may say, self-evident ; that is, it 
requires only the most elementary knowledge 
of history to make it clear to any one. At the 
time when the apostles set out to preach the 
gospel, and convert the world, the Old Testa- 
ment was the only part of the Bible that had 
been written. But evidently it was not the Old 
Testament which they preached, though they 
certainty used it to confirm their preaching, in 
very much the same way, it may be remarked, 
that the Catholic Church uses the whole Bible 
to-day. 

No ; the bulk of their preaching was their 
own personal testimony to the great revelation 
which had been committed to their care. 
They spoke, as SS. Peter and John said (Acts 
iv. 20), the things which they had seen and 
heard; as St. John says more explicitly 



2D 



Bible Protestantism. 



(I. John i. 3) , " That which we have seen and 
have heard, we declare unto 3^ou. M They had 
no need of written documents to remind them 
of these wonderful events, which, even had they 
tried, they could not forget. 

And it w r as on their personal testimony, 
supported by the miracles which they worked, 
and which made it evident that the Holy Ghost 
was speaking by their lips, that their converts, 
the first Christians, believed in Christ. They 
read no Bible ; they needed none. 

After a while, one by one, the books of the 
New Testament were written by six of the apos- 
tles, Peter, Paul, Matthew, John, James, and 
Jude, and by two of their companions, Mark 
and I,uke. The four Gospels were written to 
put in a permanent form the principal events 
of our Lord's life and death, to give an au- 
thentic record of it for posterity, and also for 
the use of those who, even in the times of the 
apostles themselves, might have occasion to in- 
struct others in it, and who had not perhaps the 
advantage of being eye-witnesses of what they 
had to tell, and at any rate not the special 
Divine assistance promised to the apostles them- 
selves. 

But these Gospels were necessarily incom- 
plete accounts of the great matter of which they 
treated ; St. John himself says, in the close 
of his, that " there are also many other things 



Bible Protestantism. 



21 



that Jesus did, 9 9 and to show that he does not 
mean merely the things narrated by the other 
evangelists, but not by himself, he adds, that if 
all were written, the world could not contain the 
books. 

It is impossible, of course, to take these 
words literally; but still they mean a great 
deal. And let it not be said now, that 
these other things omitted by the evangelists 
were unimportant ; St. John evidently is not 
speaking of such things as walking, eating, or 
drinking, but of miracles which our Saviour 
worked, or instructions which He gave. 
Indeed, we do not need St. John to tell us that 
our Lord must have said much more to His 
disciples than is recorded in these short Gospels, 
and especially in the time between His resur- 
rection and ascension, when he was, as St. 
Luke tells us (Acts i. 3), "for forty days ap- 
pearing to them and speaking of the kingdom 
of God." 

The other books of the New Testament, with 
the exception of the Acts, which is as it were a 
continuation of the Gospels, but in a certain 
way still more incomplete, being principally 
occupied with the acts and words of only one 
of the apostles, and of the revelation of St. 
John, which we can hardly use confidently on 
account of its mysterious nature, are epistles 
written from time to time, evidently principally 



22 



Bible Protestantism. 



to Christians, and therefore intended not so 
much to teach the world Christian truth as to 
instruct Christians more fully, or to remind 
them of what they had already been told. 

It is, then, perfectly clear that the apostles 
did not take the New Testament as the ground 
of their instructions. It would have been ab- 
surd for them to use each other's epistles as the 
basis of their preaching ; the Gospels were no 
doubt more frequently appealed to as time went 
on. But substantially it is plain that Christian- 
ity went on during the first century with com- 
paratively little appeal to the Bible, and with 
little need to use it. And it could not have 
been used as a whole, and therefore, according to 
Protestant ideas, Christianity must have labored 
under great difficulties until the end of the first 
century ; for the Bible was not completed till 
about that time. I trust, then, that it is clear 
that this book, holy and precious as it undoubt- 
edly is, was not the principal foundation of 
Christianity in the early Christian times. 

Let us now see whether the view can be 
held that it is the only foundation on which 
we can safely rest our religion now. 

The Protestant theory is that the pure Chris- 
tian truth, as held in the days when the Bible 
was written, was gradually corrupted and 
obscured by human additions and interpreta- 
tions ; and that the only way to get rid of these 



Bible Protestantism. 23 

Is to sweep everything else away at one stroke, 
and depend on the Bible alone. 

Now, it must be respectfully submitted that 
this theory is unsatisfactory. For, granting 
that the Bible as we have it is a faithful record, 
so far as it goes, of the actions and teaching of 
our Lord and of His apostles, and that the pic- 
ture which it presents of primitive Christianity 
is, so far as that picture is clear and certain, a 
true one ; nevertheless it is plain that this 
record and this picture are far from being as 
complete or as clear as they should be. That 
the text of the Bible is not clear and con- 
clusive on many points of doctrine on which it 
does treat, is sufficiently proved by the very dis- 
cordances of those who attempt to deduce doc- 
trine from it without any other aid ; that it is 
not complete is equally manifest. As has been 
said, there are great gaps in its account, notably 
its almost entire silence on the instructions 
given by our Lord during the time of His 
risen life on earth ; and it is an absolutely 
gratuitous and unwarrantable assumption to 
take for granted that the matters which it omits 
were of no importance. Nowhere is it said in 
the Bible that such is the case. Some, it is 
true, imagine that St. John means to say this, 
where in the close of his revelation — which is 
also, as we have it, the close of the Bible itself — 
"if any man shall add to these things, God 



Bible Protestantism. 



shall add unto him the plagues written in this 
book." But it hardly needs to be remarked 
that St. John speaks here of the prophecies 
contained in this particular book of revelation 
which he had written ; for the Bible itself was 
not collected into one book at the time at which 
he was writing. 

We have, then, no guarantee that there are 
not important matters of Christian faith which 
are not to be found in the Bible at all. We 
may indeed say that the points accepted by the 
Catholic Church are inconsistent with or even 
contrary to the Bible; but that does not help 
us. That others have added something errone- 
ous does not show that there was nothing true 
and important which should have been added. 

It does not get us out of the difficulty that 
our Bible record is fragmentary. If we use it 
alone, we are in the same position as those 
would be who should try to construct a com- 
plete Roman history simply out of the books of 
Livy or Tacitus, reliable as these books might 
be. If we act honestly, we must confess that 
we have no certainty, if we proceed on these 
lines, that we have the whole Christian faith or 
can ever obtain it; it is something which the 
apostles had, but which has, perhaps, now to a 
great extent been lost ; we have some pieces of 
it, but not with any certainty the whole. It is, 
as has been said, merely a wreck which has 



Bible Protestantism. 



25 



come down to us. Science, it is true, may by- 
means of analogies, and the general plan of ani- 
mal construction, fill up a whole skeleton from a 
few bones ; but we cannot do that with a thing 
so unique as a Divine revelation. 

But, it may be argued, half a loaf is better 
than no bread. True; but that only half a 
loaf in this case should be left us, that we know 
less of the Christian faith than the first Chris- 
tians did, would imply an imperfection, a 
partial failure in the work of God ; it would 
mean that He undertook to make a revelation to 
the world, and failed to take the means neces- 
sary to perpetuate it. 

If, driven from this idea by its inconsistency 
with the Divine Omnipotence, we say that all 
necessary Christian truth must have come down 
to us in the Bible, we are simply begging the 
question whether or no anything has come 
down to us outside the Bible. We cannot dis- 
pose of this by objecting to some teachings of 
the Roman Church ; there still remains a possi- 
bility that somewhere or other some body of 
believers, such as the Greeks for example, 
may be in possession of the entire revelation. 
We cannot be excused from satisfying ourselves 
by thorough investigation on this point. And 
we should also be sure that the teachings of 
Rome are really inconsistent with the Bible. 
Can you say that by your own study you are 



26 Bible Protestantism. 



sure of this, or that you know by actual inquiry, 
from Catholic authorities, what the teachings 
of Rome really are ? 

If Almighty God had in the Bible or else- 
where told us that this book contained the 
whole of Christianity, we should be on good 
ground. If Christ Himself had written the 
book and set it forth as a text-book, so to 
speak, of His religion, we could rest securely in 
it, and have no need to inquire farther. 

That the Bible is not a book, like the Koran 
for instance, set forth by the founder of the re- 
ligion as its authoritative exposition, is in fact 
the fundamental weakness of Bible Protestant- 
ism. If Christ had intended His religion to be 
propagated and preserved by means of a book, 
can any conceivable reason be urged why He 
should not have written one ? Of His ability to 
do so there can, for the Christian, be no ques- 
tion. 

But the Bible, so far from being such a book, 
is simply, as far as the New Testament, its im- 
portant part for us, is concerned, a collection of 
Christian writings, on its face not essentially 
more conclusive than the works of other early 
Christian writers would be, especially if we 
consider the Gospel of St. Mark, and the Gospel 
and Acts of St. L,uke ; for no special reason is 
evident why their words should be infallible. 
They were not apostles ; and we do not read of 



Bible Protestantism. 



27 



their having any peculiar Divine commission to 
teach Christianity to the world. 

Now, this consideration opens another chasm 
under the feet of Bible Protestants, which would 
be of itself fatal to them. It is this : what 
certainty have they, after all, that the books of 
the Bible were written by inspired men, and that 
no others were ? Why do they admit just these, 
and reject others ? How do they know for sure 
even that these were written by the authors to 
whom they are commonly ascribed ? For one 
thing, do they know for sure who wrote the 
Epistle to the Hebrews, or even the Gospels 
themselves ? May it not have been some quite 
irresponsible or merely private author ? What 
critical or scholarly ability or learning can ever 
give us the certainty we need on matters like 
these, where Divine faith is so much needed, 
and error so dangerous? 

The fact is, that this blind faith in the Bible, 
as Protestants have the book, got together for 
us English-speaking people under King James, 
but trusted in as if it had been brought to earth 
visibly and publicly by an angel from heaven, 
is an act far more unreasonable and groundless 
than any which they even charge us Catholics 
with making. 

If they choose to make such a blind act, 
urging the example of so many good men 
who have done the same, or claiming that 



Bible Protestantism. 



the Spirit of God teaches them to do it, well 
and good; but let them not claim any special 
superiority of intelligence, or any particular 
reasonableness in so doing. I,et them not pre- 
tend that it is anything more than an assump- 
tion, in itself, to say the least, no better than 
that of one who would believe the Pope to be 
infallible simply because so many other good 
people believe the same, or because God seems 
to inspire him with that conviction. 

Reason is as much abandoned in one case as 
in the other ; but the latter view is not that of a 
Catholic, and I think we shall see that in fact 
reason has a good deal more to say in favor 
of the genuine Catholic position. 

And I will repeat in conclusion, lest I should 
seem to despise this holiest of books, that 
Catholics believe in it and revere it as much as 
and even more than Protestants ; but we have, 
while they have not, a rational and consistent 
ground for SO doing. 



CHAPTER III. 

THE) CATHOUC IDEA OF CHRISTIANITY. 

THOUGH others beside Bible Protestants 
have from time to time separated them- 
selves, and are now separated, from the Catholic 
Church, there seems to be no distinct theory on 
which they have done so which we need especi- 
ally consider. For either they stand on ground 
similar to that taken^by Catholics, which we are 
about to describe, or they pretend to some new 
revelation supplementary to that of Christ, 
which puts them outside the class to whom this 
book is specially addressed ; or they have 
ceased to regard Christ as a Divine, or at least 
infallible, teacher, being in fact eclectics in the 
matter of religion, and not believing, strictly 
speaking, in any one true religion at all, and 
therefore equally outside of our direct scope. 

We will then take up at once the Catholic 
idea, or theory if you wish to call it so, of the 
Christian religion, as distinguished from that 
which we have been discussing. j 

This theory simply is that the Christian faith 
has been taught, and was intended by its 
Divine Founder to be taught, in all ages on the 
same plan that was adopted in the beginning ; 

39 



3° 



The Catholic Idea of Christianity. 



that Is to say, by authorized human teachers, 
whose adherence to it has been secured by a 
special Divine assistance, as that of the apos- 
tles was in the beginning. 

Now this is, of course, an impossible plan for 
a merely human founder of a religion. A mere 
man, who has arrived by meditation and the 
practice of virtue at some great religious truths, 
or what he considers as such, even though he 
also believes that in this he has been assisted by 
Almighty God in some special way, cannot feel 
safe as to the propagation of these truths with- 
out loss or admixture by simply committing 
them to the charge of other men. The precise 
memory of what he, the founder, said will 
gradually be lost ; the ideas of his representa- 
tives will after a time be confounded with his 
own. Of course he may be content that such 
should be the case ; he may regard the religion 
which is taught in his name as intended by 
God to be the work of many co-operators ; he 
lays the foundation, others continue the build- 
ing ; and perhaps even the foundation may be 
somewhat altered or improved as time goes on. 
But a religion like this is not such as those 
whom we are addressing regard the Christian 
religion to be. 

For a human founder, then, who wishes the 
record of his ideas to be perpetual ; who desires 
that none of them should be lost, and that noth* 



The Catholic Idea of Christianity. 31 



ing should be admitted outside of them in the 
religion which he establishes, except indeed 
what the light of nature teaches all men, no 
course seems to be open except to commit his 
ideas or his religion to writing. In this^ way 
there can remain little doubt, except what may 
arise from the errors of copyists or printers, as 
to what he actually said ; and generally these 
errors will be slight and easily detected. 

But after all, though it is the best course he 
can adopt, it is open to serious. difficulties. For 
no language can be made so plain that there 
will not be an opening for discussions as to its 
meaning. To take an example from another 
matter, the Constitution of the United States 
was drawn up with the utmost care ; but for all 
that it is not possible, and never was expected 
by its authors to be possible, for every one to 
agree on its meaning without a court to inter- 
pret it. 

Now, it is true that a human founder of reli- 
gion can provide for such a court of interpreta- 
tion for his ideas, and his provisions will proba- 
bly be carried out; but he cannot possibly 
insure that the ideas of this court will always 
agree with his own. His own thoughts will 
then, in spite of all he can do, be gradually 
changed somewhat by the gloss put upon them 
by his interpreters. 

But for a Divine founder these objections can- 



32 The "Catholic Idea of Christianity. 



not, of course: exist. God is able to keep His 
truth in the world in many ways. He can, for 
instance, reveal it to each man individually ; or 
He can by repeated public manifestations of it, 
accompanied by miraculous proofs such as those 
furnished by Christ and His apostles, prevent 
the world from forgetting it ; or He can commit 
it to a book, as a human founder would, pre- 
venting false interpretations of that book by 
making it so clear that it could not be misun- 
derstood, or by establishing a court of interpre- 
tation for it, the decisions of which He would 
Himself secure from error. 

But on the Protestant theory, He has adopted 
neither of these plans. The only book which 
they admit as coming from Him is not so clear 
that it cannot be misunderstood, nor, according 
to them, has any court been established by Him 
for its correct interpretation. Some of them, 
indeed, claim that He does reveal it to every 
earnest inquirer without the aid of any visible 
teacher, but the actual discordance of those who 
claim to arrive at it in that way, or even with 
the help of the Bible, is enough to confute that 
claim. As for repeated miraculous manifesta- 
tions of it, such are not recorded in history. 

Other methods could no doubt be followed by 
the Divine Wisdom, beside these which I have 
mentioned ; but we cannot, perhaps, see them 
very clearly, with the exception of one, the 



The Catholic Idea of Christianity. 33 



simplest of all that we know of, and requiring 
the least special intervention on God's part. 
And that is the one which I have mentioned 
as that which Catholics believe He has adopted 
through the whole course of Christianity, and 
which Protestants themselves must admit He 
did at its beginning. 

It is that of having for a fundamental author- 
ity in all ages, for a means of deciding all 
doubtful points, not a book alone, or a book 
with authorized interpreters, but simply the au- 
thorized interpreters of the faith such as the 
apostles were, with a book perhaps to help 
them, but still not absolutely needing that book 
for the discharge of their office any more than 
the apostles themselves did for theirs. 

This simple plan it is the essential point of 
Protestantism to ignore or combat. As has 
been seen, they have nothing satisfactory or 
historically successful to offer in place of it, but 
it they will not admit. 

Some Protestants, like those of the Church of 
England, go so far as to believe in an organized 
and Divinely constituted body of men, estab- 
lished to teach and preserve the faith of Christ ; 
but they refuse to admit a Divine supervision of 
this teaching, at least of such a kind as will 
enable any one without hesitation to know just 
where to look for the truth. Their ground, as 
has been said, is similar to ours 4 but lacking ic 



34 The Catholic Idea of Christianity. 



this important respect. And history shows only 
too plainly that the Church, in their sense of 
the term, has varied in its doctrine, taught dog- 
mas at various times, and in various places at 
the same time, inconsistent with each other, and 
therefore to a considerable extent erroneous. 

Protestants, then, and indeed all Christians 
separated from the Catholic Church, do not 
acknowledge the existence of this actual living 
and precisely determinable authorit} 7 in the 
world, to which the preservation of the faith has 
been entrusted. It is, indeed, possible to with- 
draw from the government and discipline which 
Catholics believe to be also entrusted to this 
authority, without doubting its claim to be the 
Divinely constituted teacher of the faith; but 
this sort of rebellion against it, which we call 
schism, hardly exists pure and simple at 
present ; the Greek Church furnishing, how- 
ever, a near approximation to it. 

The question now naturally arising, as we 
examine the Catholic theory, is where precisely 
this authority is located; who are the succes- 
sors of the apostles, not, be it observed, in their 
inspiration, or in their power of working mira- 
cles, but in this office so needed for the stability 
of religion, that of interpreting the true meaning 
of the Christian revelation, and of deciding 
doubts which might arise about it. 

Whoever they are, they must be men dis- 



The Catholic Idea of Christianity. 35 



tinctly recognizable ; not merely men noted for 
talent or learning, or even for virtue, since these 
tests are too vague and doubtful. They must, 
therefore, be men occupying some definite posi- 
tion in the Church ; they must naturally belong 
to the clergy, since teaching the faith belongs 
to them, if anything does ; and to the highest 
and most distinguished rank of the clergy, if 
such ranks exist in it. 

As it is, then, only among those Christians 
who recognize such ranks or grades in the 
clergy that this belief in a certain living author- 
ity in matters exists, only two opinions can well 
exist upon this point. One is, that the whole 
body of bishops must be called to a council, and 
that this council, with the assistance of the 
Holy Spirit, determines the faith ; or that one 
or more of them have been, by a special Divine 
prerogative, appointed to this office. 

The latter is the teaching of the Catholic 
Church, as formulated in the Vatican Council. 
Its decision necessarily removes the doubts of 
such as might otherwise have held that the 
meeting of the bishops generally was necessary 
for authoritative judgments on points of faith ; 
for here they have their own authority speak- 
ing. 

The Vatican Council, then, teaches unequivo- 
cally that the supreme power in determining 
matters of faith rests in the person of the Pope 



36 The Infallibility of the Pope. 



whom Catholics regard as the successor of St. 
Peter in the Apostolic See of Rome. 

We will proceed, then, in the next chapter to 
discuss this matter of the infallibility, as it is 
Called, of the Pope; to explain just what is 
meant by it, and to remove misapprehensions 
which may exist. 

CHAPTER IV. 

THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 

IT ought to be clear from what has been said 
that the special prerogative which Catholics 
now unhesitatingly and universally believe to 
have been conferred on the Pope by the Divine 
Founder of Christianity has a very special and 
limited range, though certainly very complete in 
its proper domain. It consists in his ability to 
decide questions concerning religion about 
which there might be room for doubt in the 
minds of Christians, either on account of there 
being a large number of adherents, or apparently 
strong arguments, on both sides of the ques- 
tions. Of course if an opinion is clearly sup- 
ported by the plain text of Scripture, or if it has 
been held by general consent in the Church as 
being of faith, or if it has been settled by a 
previous decision, there is no need for the Pope 
to interfere ; and in point of fact he seldom does 



The Infallibility of the Pope. 37 

so. But still a good many cases have occurred, 
and probably will occur, in which such an adju- 
dication becomes necessary. It is not required 
that an appeal should be made to him ; he acts 
as it seems expedient to himself, not neglecting, 
however, in matters of considerable doubt to 
take advice from learned men. 

In the more important questions which occa- 
sionally arise, it has always been deemed more 
prudent to formally convoke the whole episco- 
pate in a general or oecumenical council, and not 
only to hear their opinions, but to take their 
vote on the matter; for the bishops are not 
merely advisers, but really judges of the faith 
with the Pope. But the decision of their major- 
ity would not be accepted unless confirmed by 
him. 

Now, let it be clearly understood that it is not 
the office of the Pope to act as one inspired, to 
receive or to give to the world any new revela- 
tion. It is merely to decide what the original 
deposit, as we call it, of faith was, as committed 
by Christ to His apostles ; or, in other words, to 
repeat the decisions which the apostles them- 
selves would have made with regard to the doc- 
trines of Christianity. 

Still less is it his office to settle matters of 
science, or ordinary questions of fact of any 
kind. Not but what the domains claimed at 
least by science, and those of faith, may some- 



38 The Infallibility of the Pope. 



times overlap ; as, for instance, they may to some 
extent in the matter of evolution, especially if 
that is supposed to apply to the human soul ; or 
as they certainly do when so-called science 
asserts that matter existed from all eternity. I 
say " so-called " science, for it is plain that we 
can never by scientific investigation arrive at 
any proof of a hypothesis of this nature. And 
even questions of historical fact may belong to 
faith, by being necessarily connected with some 
of its dogmas, or by forming part of the inspired 
record of Holy Scripture; there would, for in- 
stance, be a conflict of history or geology with 
the Church if it should be asserted, in the name 
of either of these branches of learning, that the 
account of the deluge was simply a myth. 

But conflicts of this sort are very rare. Prac- 
tically a Catholic is not impeded in any kind of 
study or investigation by any fear of Papal con- 
demnation. L 

Further — and this is an important and much 
misapprehended point — it would be an enor- 
mous mistake to suppose that the Pope is con- 
sidered infallible, even on matters of faith, in 
his ordinary conversation ; nor is he believed 
to be so in preaching ; nor necessarily in his 
writings concerning matters of religion. In or- 
der that he should be infallible, it is necessary 
that he should act formally as the teacher of the 
whole Church, as the successor of the apostles ; 



The Infallibility of the Pope. 39 

and practically we may say it is necessary that 
his" teaching should not be given by word of 
mouth, but in waiting, in a regular document; 
for if he merely spoke, some uncertainty would 
exist as to what he actually said, whatever 
means might be taken to report it. 

And yet, though all this is well known and 
understood among Catholics, how many Pro- 
testants there are who imagine that we believe 
the Pope to be incapable of error, no matter 
what he is speaking about, or in what way or 
under what circumstances he expresses his 
thoughts ; or perhaps that we even regard him 
as infallible in the very thoughts themselves ! 

Great as this error is, many fall into an error 
much greater. It is often supposed, indeed we 
sometimes see it stated, or what is even worse, 
calmly assumed, in the literature of the day, 
that Catholics believe the Pope to be incapable 
of doing anything morally wrong. Infallibility 
is confounded with impeccability. One would 
suppose that the English language would be 
better understood ; indeed, on other subjects the 
writers of this nonsense seem to be men of fair 
accuracy. It is only in speaking of us that 
they make these absurd blunders. 

This whole notion is simply ridiculous. 
Good Catholics have, indeed, generally a re- 
spect for the clergy ; at least they have a high 
idea of what their character should be, and when 



« 

40 The Infallibility of the Pope. 



the clergy live fairly good lives, are disposed to 
rate their virtue as greater than it actually is ; 
and especially, they believe the Pope, unless the 
contrary should be plainly evident, to be a man 
of more than the usual moral excellence which 
they ascribe to the clergy in general. And they 
have reason for doing so ; for it is clear before- 
hand that the Church would, if we may say so, 
be naturally inclined to put its best foot fore- 
most ; and also the actual lives of the Popes, as 
recorded in history, show plainly that they were 
as a rule most estimable, perhaps even saintly, 
men. 

But they are very far from thinking that this 
is necessarily the case. So far from thinking 
that an action is right simply because the Pope 
does it, they would be more scandalized at a 
departure from the moral law in his case than 
they w r ould in that of any one else ; just as it is 
perfectly obvious that they are more disedified 
by a sin in any clergyman than by the same one 
in a layman. 

It is of course true, however, that in points 
about which the conscience of men is more or 
less uncertain, Catholics, and Protestants as 
well, are inclined to think it probable that an 
action is right if they see a clergyman do it; 
for they know that the clergy give more study 
to these matters, and believe that they would as 
a rule act according to their conscience, which 



The Infallibility of the Pope. 41 



would naturally be better instructed than that 
of the laity in general. But Catholics do not, 
any more than Protestants, hold it as certain 
that any clergyman, or that the Pope any more 
necessarily than any other clergyman, does 
uniformly act according to his conscience. 

And let me mention here, though it is a 
little out of our direct line, another foolish 
error entertained largely about the Pope, which 
seems to be a sort of corollary, as a geometer 
would say, or, in other words, an easy conclu- 
sion from his supposed impeccability. That is 
the notion often entertained by those outside 
the Catholic Church, that the Pope never goes 
to confession. Some even think that the clergy 
do not ; but more are quite sure that the Pope 
is exempt. 

But so far is this from being the case that 
the clergy confess much more frequently than 
the laity in general ; and the Pope himself fully 
as often as, if not oftener than the average of 
the clergy. And to whom does the Pope 
confess? Why, he chooses his confessor, 
as any one else would do ; usually he would 
select some priest of well-known virtue and 
learning ; probably he would choose a member 
of some religious order — for example, a Fran- 
ciscan, a Dominican, or a Jesuit. You see then 
clearly that the Pope himself does not believe 
that he is sinless. 



42 The Infallibility of the Pope. 



This matter of morality of which I have been 
speaking has, however, a connection with the 
infallibility which we are discussing, though 
not the one which is erroneously supposed. 

It is this : Catholics do believe the Pope to 
be able to make infallible decisions with regard 
to morals as well as faith. That is to say, that 
he can, when occasion arises, solemnly instruct 
the faithful with regard to principles of morality, 
and decide points with regard to it on which 
good and learned men have differed ; and there 
are plenty of such points, as any one will see 
who will take the trouble to consult treatises on 
morals. One will find even more of them in 
Catholic works than in Protestant ones ; not, 
however, for the reason that Catholic morality 
is less precise than Protestant, but because 
Catholic writers have discussed these matters 
much more thoroughly and with much more 
detail, and hence come upon more of these 
questions ; and that the Popes have still left 
many of them open. 

But mind, it by no means follows, any more 
in moraH than in faith, that because the Pope 
can solemnly instruct the faithful infallibly, he 
always or on all occasions holds or gives utter- 
ance to correct views with regard to right 01 
wrong, unless the matter is one clear to all rea- 
sonable men, or that some decision has actually 
been made in due form with regard to it. 



The Infallibility of the Pope. 43 



Still less does it follow that he necessarily 
lives up to the principles which he himself 
acknowledges as true. There is no essential 
reason why he should do so, any more than any 
one else. 

Now a few remarks, more explicit than those 
previously made, with regard to the way in 
which we suppose the infallibility to attach to 
the Pope's solemn teaching of the Church with 
regard to faith and morals. . In the first place, 
it is clear, from what has been said, that he is 
not habitually raised to any higher plane in 
these matters than other Christians; for it is 
only at the time of his formal decisions that he 
needs to be, and we do not suppose his preroga- 
tive to extend any farther than is needed for the 
good of the Church. Secondly, we do not hold 
that even at these times he is, properly speak- 
ing, inspired ; it is simply that God assists him 
in a special way, preventing him from making 
any decision at all if the way is not reasonably 
clear to it ; or if He allows him to make the 
decision, insuring that this decision shall con- 
tain nothing contrary to the truth. v_ 

As a matter of fact, these formal decisions, or 
definitions as we call them, are not made care- 
lessly or on the spur of the moment, but after 
much consideration and prayer, especially in 
the more important matters, and even in lesser 
ones where reasonable doubt seems to exist. 



44 The Infallibility of the Pope. 

And in the greater matters, much advice is also 
taken, especially of the bishops, who, as has 
been said, are regarded as judges on these 
questions together with the Pope; and often 
this precaution has gone so far as the assem- 
bling of a general council, where the subject 
could be fully discussed. 

I trust, then, that this much misunderstood 
subject ought to be somewhat clearer to those 
who may read what has been just said than it 
was before. And let me add now, as a little 
argument in support of the belief that Almighty 
God does actually preserve these Papal defini- 
tions from error, the historical fact that no two 
of them have ever been contradictory, and they 
have all formed with each other, and with the 
faith as determined and agreed on without re- 
course to them, a logical and consistent whole. 
Human reason, memory, research, and learn- 
ing are no doubt factors which would go far to 
produce such a result ; but human passions are 
also potent ; and it seems very unlikely that 
such a success would be obtained, covering a 
period of eighteen hundred years, by human 
resources alone. 

But still it may be said that this Divine inter- 
position is a miracle which we have no right to 
expect. L,et us look into this. It is true that 
the whole Christian revelation is a blessing to 
which we have no right ; but if God wills to 



The Infallibility of the Pope. 4y 



give something to mankind in permanence, it is 
reasonable to suppose that He will take mea- 
sures to secure that permanence. And could 
any simpler measures, any requiring less inter- 
position on His part, be adopted, so far as we 
can see? Protestants give us a book; they 
acknowledge that it is naturally obscure in 
some parts, but say that God will enlighten the 
reader as to its meaning. I say nothing about 
the confutation of this theory by actual experi- 
ence ; but in itself it is plain that it requires 
even more interposition on God's part for each 
individual Christian than the Catholic one does 
for the Pope alone. 

Catholics claim that the Pope is infallible on 
certain occasions ; Protestants that each arid 
every one of them is infallible all the time. 
Which claim is the greater or the more un- 
reasonable ? 

Some one must be infallible, now and then at 
least, or certainty with regard to the Christian 
faith becomes impossible. Why should it not 
be the Pope, who occupies, as is admitted even 
by Protestants themselves, the most prominent 
position in Christendom ? 

But let us see briefly whether there are not 
arguments, drawn from the Holy Scripture 
itself, to show that the Pope must be the one to 
whom this special prerogative has been given, 
if given to any. 



46 The Infallibility of the Pope. 

We find, if we read the Gospels attentively, 
that our Lord, though giving to each of the 
apostles the same general commission to teach 
all nations (Matt, xxviii. 19), did not treat them 
on terms of absolute equality. Peter, James, 
and John were, in the first place, specially se- 
lected by Him as witnesses of His transfigura- 
tion, and His agony in the garden of Gethse- 
mane. Of these James had the privilege of 
being first called to join His Master in heaven ; 
John of being His specially beloved disciple, 
and the one to whom Jesus on the cross en- 
trusted the care of His mother, the Blessed 
Virgin Mary. I 

But it was to Peter that He gave the most 
marked signs of a special pre-eminence over the 
rest. Especially do we see this in the cele- 
brated passage (Matt. xvi. 18) where Christ 
says to him, ''Thou art Peter, and upon this 
rock I will build my church ' ' ; the word 
Peter meaning a rock. And in St. Luke's 
Gospel we read (Luke xxii. 31): "The Lord 
said, Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired 
to have you, that he may sift you as wheat. 
But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail 
not ; and thou being once converted, confirm 
thy brethren.' ' (The italics are, of course, our 
own.) And St. John tells us (John xxi. 15-17) 
that our Lord thrice committed in a special way 
the charge of His lambs and sheep to Peter, in 



The Infallibility of the Pope. 47 

response to nis protestation of love for his 
Master : "Feed my lambs, feed my lambs, feed 
my sheep." 

Protestants try, of course, to explain away 
these passages ; but it is hard to imagine that 
they do not place St. Peter in some way at the 
head of the apostolic college, and as having in a 
special way the right of governing and teach- 
ing the faithful which all the apostles enjoyed. 
The real question is rather whether or no this 
pre-eminence of Peter passed to any one at his 
death ; whether he had any successor in his 
special privileges. 

But one thing seems quite clear: that there 
could be no one to whom any special pre- 
eminence could be assigned as a permanent in- 
stitution in the Church, except some one who 
was in some special sense the successor of St. 
Peter. 

Now, no one has even claimed to be the suc- 
cessor of St. Peter in any special way whatever 
except the Bishop of Rome, in which city, by 
the common consent of Christians, it has been 
generally agreed St. Peter fixed his ultimate 
residence, and in which he suffered martyrdom. 
No one else except the Bishop of Antioch, 
which city St. Peter first chose for his see, could 
reasonably make such a claim ; and on his part 
no such claim has been urged. 

If, then, there is any one who has a claim 



48 The Infallibility of the Pope. 



founded in Scripture to any pre-eminence over 
the bishops of the Church in general, that one 
must be the bishop of St. Peter's see of Rome ; 
and indeed this distinction has been generally 
accorded in some way or shape to this bishop, 
or, in other words, to the Pope, even by those 
who have separated themselves from his con- 
trol. 

There is, in short, no plausible candidate 
for the leadership of the Church except the 
Pope; and there never has been one except 
him, who could rest his claim on Scriptural 
grounds. 

If, then, this office of infallible teacher of the 
faith, or restorer of it when it may in the lapse 
of time become doubtful, this office which has 
been shown to be the means by which the faith 
could be preserved with the minimum of Divine 
interposition, belongs to any one, it is to the 
Pope that it would naturally belong ; and he is 
the only one who has permanently claimed or 
exercised it, no pretensions on the part of 
others . having, we may say, been seriously 
made or entertained. 

It would seem, then, that the Catholic claim 
of the Pope's infallibility, after the manner 
which has been described, is both reasonable 
and Scriptural. I do not propose here to go 
into a further proof of it, or a defence of it 
against objections which might be made ; to do 



The Infallibility of the Pope. 49 



so properly would require a volume ; and such 
volumes have been written, and can be con- 
sulted by all. But I -do submit that this Catho- 
lic claim or theory, so far from being supersti- 
tious or unreasonable, is prima facie the most 
reasonable one that can be urged (especially 
when we consider actual historical facts) , if we 
assume that the Christian religion was a de- 
finite teaching of supernatural truths to be per- 
petuated to the end of time ; and that its superi- 
ority in reasonableness to the theory either that 
the Bible was originally intended to be, or that 
it now has become in the providence of God, the 
only means available for this end, is obvious on 
the very surface to any one who will give th^ 
matter any serious consideration. 

In the next chapter I will proceed to explain 
the exalted opinion which Catholics have, and 
the use which we make, of that most holy and 
venerable book, the Bible ; to show that we 
regard it as truly the Word of God, and to state 
the reasons which we have for doing so. 



CHAPTER V. 



THE CATHOUC IDEA OF THE BIBLE. 

IT has been stated that Catholics regard the 
Bible as the Word of God, and revere it as 
such, no less than Protestants ; and indeed 
even more. We look on it, then, as a most 
certain testimony to the Christian religion, and 
a most pure source from which to obtain the 
true faith. We reject nothing which it con- 
tains, we accept it as a most precious gift of 
God, from beginning to end. 

We accept, indeed, more of it than Protestants 
do. For, as has been said, there are some 
books, which all belong, by the way, to the Old 
Testament, w r hich we have in our Bibles, but 
which are omitted from most Protestant ones. 
In other words, Protestants, at the time of the 
Reformation, reformed the Bible as well as a 
good many other things ; they dropped from it 
a number of books which their forefathers for 
centuries had considered as forming a part of it. 

And now let us see what reason we have for 
accepting the Bible as we have it. It is hard to 
see how a Protestant can have absolute cer- 
tainty that all the books of his Bible are in- 
spired. If he makes a study of the matter, he 

50 



The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 5* 



will find that many learned men doubt even the 
authenticity of great portions of it ; so he can- 
not rest his faith in it on a general agreement 
among wise men that it was really written by 
the authors to whom it is commonly assigned. 
Nor can he defend it on the ground that all 
pious and faithful Christians have always 
believed its various books to have come from 
the writers to which they are usually ascribed, 
or that they have always considered them as 
inspired by the Spirit of God. Of course there 
is a difference between these two beliefs ; there 
seems, for instance, to be no obvious reason, as 
has been remarked, why the writings of Mark 
or Iyuke, even if we are sure we have them, 
should be inspired any more than those of any 
other of the early Christians. 

The fact is, that during all the ages of perse- 
cution — that is, during the first three centuries 
of Christianity, and for a considerable time 
after— though the books of the Old Testament 
had been accepted from the Jews, those of the 
New were still by no means put in a definite 
shape. Eusebius, bishop of Csesarea, the cele- 
brated ecclesiastical historian, writing in the 
early part of the fourth century, tells us that 
several of the books we now accept were then in 
doubt. 

He says, for instance, in the first book of his 
history, with regard to the second Epistle of 



§2 The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 

St. Peter: u We have not, indeed, understood it 
to be embodied with the sacred books, yet as it 
appeared useful to many, it was studiously read 
with the other Scriptures" (chap, iii.) And 
in another place (chap, xxiv.) he remarks, 
" Besides the Gospel of John, his first Epistle is 
acknowledged without dispute, both by those 
of the present day, and also by the ancients. 
The other two Epistles, however, are disputed. 
The opinions respecting the Revelation are still 
greatly divided/ ' A little later on (chap. xxv.> 
he gives the following canon of the New 
Testament, quite in full: "Here, among the 
first, must be placed the holy quaternion of the 
Gospels ; these are followed by 1 The Book of 
the Acts of the Apostles 1 ; after this must be 
mentioned the Epistles of Paul, which are 
followed by the acknowledged first Epistle of 
John, as also the first of Peter, to be admitted 
in like manner. After these are to be placed, 
if proper, the Revelation of John, concerning 
which we shall offer the different opinions in 
due time. TljLese, then, are acknowledged as 
genuine. Among the disputed books, although 
they are well known and approved by many, is 
reputed that called the Epistle of James and 
Jude. Also the 'second Epistle of Peter/ and 
those called the 'second and third of John,' 
whether they are of the evangelist or some 
other of the same name." He also states 



The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 



53 



further on that a good deal of doubt existed as 
to the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews; 
this point is, indeed, at the present time a good 
deal discussed by critics. 

It is evident, then, that in the time of 
Kusebius no certainty was felt as to precisely 
what books of the New Testament should be 
admitted as being of authority. Various other 
authors, previous and subsequent to Eusebius, 
give somewhat different catalogues of the 
sacred books. 

Now, the point is when and in what way the 
canon of the New Testament was first definitely 
settled on; that is, settled by an authority 
which might seem at least to speak in the name 
of the Church, and not merely in that of private 
criticism or learning. 

The first Christian synod which we find as 
sanctioning a special canon, or collection of 
books as properly belonging to the Bible, was 
that of Hippo, in Africa, in the year 393* This 
canon of Hippo was confirmed by councils held 
at Carthage in 397 and 419, and in 474, as 
nearly as can be ascertained, by Pope Gelasius. 
This canon is identical with that now held as 
the correct one by Catholics, and solemnly 
repeated in the Council of Trent, at the time of 
the Reformation. It contains, therefore, what 
Protestants call the apocryphal books of the Old 
Testament, but it rejects none of those which 



54 



The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 



Protestants receive; in the new Testament 
there is no difference between the two, the 
Protestants, having taken the same books as 
genuine and inspired which the Catholic 
Church had so regarded, and no others. 

Now, it is quite manifest why Catholics re- 
gard just such books as belonging to the Bible, 
and such others as not so belonging. It is 
because such is the decision of the Church 
assembled in council, and of the Popes acting 
in their official capacity. Whatever one may 
think of it, it is evidently a clear and intelli- 
gible reason ; for we regard the Church and the 
Popes as infallible in such matters. 

But what solid reason have Protestants to 
induce them to accept any definite canon of 
Scripture ? Not the decrees of the Popes or the 
councils of the Church of course, for these they 
do not accept in other matters. And if not 
these, what else ? Why is the canon of Pope 
Gelasius any better for them than the one we 
have given, from Eusebius, the historian? It 
becomes for them simply a matter of private 
judgment whether a certain book of the Bible 
is inspired or not ; and therefore since the Bible 
is all they have as an authoritative basis for 
Christianity, the strength of this sole authority 
becomes thus a matter of private judgment; 
many, if not most of its books become not sub- 
stantially better than others written in early 



The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 



55 



Christian times which might be used instead of 
them ; and indeed the whole matter of faith 
reduces to private judgment. The Protestant 
has no sure ground to rest on; he can only 
construct his religion by selecting what it seems 
probable to him was the teaching of Christ. 
He can, of course, adopt other people's opin- 
ions ; but they also can have for him no more 
than a human value. 

But after all, it may be urged, how is your 
own basis a sure one ? You have been proving 
the Church, the infallibility of the Pope, etc., 
by means of the Bible, and now you turn round 
and prove the Bible by the Church. 

This criticism seems at first to be a very 
sound one, but it is not so sound as it appears. 
For we all have to start with some recorded 
facts, some testimony of others, in convincing 
ourselves about any matter of fact which has 
not come under our own personal observation. 
And it is absurd, and contrary to common 
sense, to say that we can never arrive at cer- 
tainty in this way. If we cannot, then we 
are not certain about any point of history ; we 
do not know for sure that there was ever such a 
person as George Washington or Christopher 
Columbus. Nay more, without depending on 
testimony we cannot be confident that there is 
now any such country as England or France, 
unless we have been there ourselves ; even the 



$6 The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 



answers we receive to letters which we under- 
take to send there may be part of a gigantic 
conspiracy set up against us by the Post-office. 

Very well then ; to prove that there was such 
a person as Christ, and to arrive at some 
knowledge of what He said and did, we take 
the accounts which have come down to us, 
either committed to writing, or handed down by 
word of mouth from one generation to another. 
We find them concurrent to a considerable ex- 
tent, and we find especially those accounts so 
concurrent which are written in what we call 
the Bible ; and the very fact that these latter 
agree well with each other, that they have been 
considered in all ages as substantially correct, 
and that we find in history no serious protest 
against them, and a general agreement as to 
their authorship, gives us more certainty as to 
what they contain than we have with regard to 
almost any facts which occurred at the time 
they appeared. We have, then, a more reason- 
able certainty about Christ, and what He did 
and said, than we have about past events not 
coming under our own observation. 

We find, then, with this reasonable certainty, 
from the Bible record, that He established a 
Church, and constituted an infallible authority 
in it, to last to the end of time ; so far, that is, 
as it is admitted that this really is the testimony 
Of the Bible. 



The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 57 

^ - * < 1 1 1 -y ■■■ ■ 

Then, being convinced of the existence of 
this authority, by means of it we establish, not 
what w r e started with, but something different. 
We are not convinced by the Church that there 
is a Bible record, and that in its main points it 
can be relied on with certainty : for this we 
knew before. But the Church tell& us that this 
book has more than a merely human au- 
thority, that it is the Word of God, inspired by 
Him; and that just such writings and such 
alone can be considered as belonging to it. 
This last is something we did not know before ; 
but our conviction of it rests on the same 
) rational grounds as our first conviction did that 
it was a trustworthy book, humanly speaking. 
One comes from the other. r 

The argument may be put, in brief, as 
follows: If the Bible is a trustworthy book, it 
is more than that ; it is inspired. For the 
Church is infallible, if the Bible is trustworthy • 
and the Church tells us that the Bible is in- 
spired. The reasoning is very similar to that 
by which we very properly prove Christ's 
Divinity. Christ, we say, was a wise and good 
man, and therefore would not claim to be God 
if He were not ; but he did claim to be God ; 
therefore He really is so. This must be 
admitted by every one who believes He did say 
various things which the Gospels recorded of 
Him. If He said them, He either was God, or 



58 The Catholic Idea of the Bible. 



He was, as the Jews maintained, a blasphemer, 
either wicked or insane. 

But after all, it may be urged that our con- 
viction of the Divine authority of the Bible will 
never at best rise to a higher certainty than the 
merely human one with which it began. 

In answer to this, it may be said, in the first 
place, that we do not depend on the Bible alone 
to prove the infallibility of the Church; nu- 
merous other arguments can be given ; as, for 
example, that already spoken of, the actual 
accordance in its decisions through all these 
centuries, which could hardly have been se- 
cured without Divine interposition. 

But the true answer is, that God, by a direct 
action of grace in our hearts, builds on a merely 
rational foundation a secure edifice of Divine 
faith. We believe by faith, not by reason; but 
our faith is rational, as reason has led us to it. 

Faith once implanted by God in our hearts, 
it will stand secure of its own strength, even if 
the rational foundation passes from our minds ; 
as a solid stone arch stands after the wooden 
frame is removed round which it was built. 

But though faith itself is thus secure in its 
own strength, and may even be immediately im- 
planted by God in an individual soul without 
argument, it is not reasonable to suppose that a 
faith independent of reason and argument can 
be intended by Him for adoption by the world. 



The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 59 



This is just the point where the Catholic 
belief in the Bible has the advantage of the 
Protestant one. The one is rational and log- 
ical ; the other irrational and blind. The 
former is founded on good reasons ; the latter 
on what is, comparatively, guesswork. 

However, it is not so much the object of this 
chapter, or of this work in general, to defend 
the faith of Catholics, as to show just what that 
faith is. 



CHAPTER VI. 

PRINCIPAL POINTS OF CATHOUC FAITH. 

C<0 far my chief endeavor has been to show 
JO what the basis of the Catholic faith is, or 
what are the sources from which we derive it. 
I trust that it is perfectly clear to all that we do 
not believe that new additions are being made 
to it as time goes on ; that we do not hold that 
the Pope or any other authority in the Church 
receives from time to time new revelations, and 
proposes them to the faithful to be received 
implicitly by them ; but that we believe the 
faith or doctrine of the Church to have been 
fully in the possession of the Apostles, and that 
if anything is promulgated or definitely decreed 
by the Church as being part of the faith, the 



6o The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 



meaning is that this was a thing which the 
Apostles themselves believed and preached. 

The Church, then, and the Holy Scripture 
are simply our means for finding out what the 
doctrine of the Apostles was. And it must not 
be imagined that we trust more to the Church 
than to the Bible. In point of fact the Bible is 
for us, as well as for Protestants, the higher 
authority of the two ; for its teaching is in- 
spired by the Holy Ghost, whereas that of the 
Pope or of the Church is merely preserved from 
error by Him. But in order to reverence the 
Holy Scripture and to learn our faith from it, it 
is necessary in the first place to know what is 
Holy Scripture for certain, and what cannot be 
depended on as such ; and it is also necessary 
to have a guide to help us to understand its 
sense, which is obscure in many places, as is 
evident by the different interpretations which 
good and learned men have put on it. But 
where its sense is plain, the Church does not 
presume to overrule or ignore it ; and the 
Church is not afraid of any part of the Bible as 
being irreconcilable with her doctrine. 
" To these two great sources of Christian truth 
another may be added with evident propriety. 
This is what we call tradition. By this we 
mean the account of the faith which is handed 
down by word of mouth, or by writing, from 
one generation to another. Any ordinarily 



The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 61 



well-instructed Catholic can, for example, give 
an account of his faith in its principal points ; 
he can teach it orally to his children, or write it 
down for those generally who are to come after 
him. Still better can this be done by the 
learned who have made the faith their special 
study. 

Now, one such statement of the doctrine of 
the Church in general, or of any special point 
or points of it, does not of itself amount to so 
very much, as the source from which it pro- 
ceeds is not infallible ; but if any point is found 
on which the great majority of these statements 
agree, the evidence in favor of this point be- 
comes very strong. It does not give the same 
certainty which comes from the plain words of 
Scripture, or from a definite decree of the 
Church itself ; but it gives something very near 
it. And the Bible itself gives testimony to the 
utility of this means in preserving the faith 
entire and unchanged. " Brethren/ ' says St. 
Paul, writing to the Thessalonians (II. Thess. 
ii. 14), "hold the traditions which you have 
learned, whether by word, or our epistle.' 1 
And to Timothy he writes (II. Tim. ii. 2), "the 
things which thou hast heard of me by many 
witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, 
who shall be fit to teach others also." 

But really we hardly need this guarantee of 
the usefulness of this method of preserving any 



62 The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 



kind of valuable information. It is practised 
constantly in all the arts and trades of men, and 
even in the sciences; and in religion it is, 
indeed, used by Protestants themselves. 

I,et us now come to the consideration of the 
actual doctrine of the Church, as derived by us 
from these three sources. But let it not be 
understood that we mean that all its points, 
though held, as we believe, by the Apostles, 
were taught by them with equal prominence. 
Some are more important than others in them- 
selves ; and some — as, for instance, that of the 
Resurrection of our L,ord — were more necessary 
to be insisted on at the times in which they 
lived and had to work. With regard to others 
also, as is simple matter of history, we know 
that instruction was in the early ages given 
secretly — that is, only to those who had been 
baptized ; in order that doctrines which were 
difficult or mysterious might not be exposed 
to public ridicule or misinterpretation. This 
"discipline of the secret,' 9 as it was called, 
applied specially to the dogma of the Real 
Presence of Christ in the consecrated elements. 

Again, other matters of faith, though very 
fundamental and important, were not so much 
insisted on in various ages of the Church as in 
others, because they were not then denied 01 
called in question. Indeed the definitions of 
the Church, the bringings of its faith to the 



The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 63 



surface as it were, have generally been oc- 
casioned by the spread of opinions contrary to 
that faith. Thus, the doctrine of the Holy 
Trinity itself was not clearly .defined for about 
three hundred years after Christ, when the 
definition was required by the emergencies of 
the time ; and so one point of faith after another 
has been specially emphasized by definitions as 
the times may seem to demand. 

The creed or collection of dogmas, then, 
which I am about to present, need not all 
have been taught with equal prominence 01 
emphasis by the Apostles ; there may, indeed, 
have been other matters to which they devoted 
more attention than to some of these. But 
these are the ones most important to be under- 
stood and formally or explicitly accepted at 
present ; they constitute the profession or 
declaration of faith made by converts to the 
Church when they are received into it ; and 
naturally the ones to which the greatest interest 
attaches. 

This profession or declaration of faith is, 
then, as follows : 

"/ (the name is here given), having before my eyes 
the holy Gospels, which I touch with my hand, and 
knowing that no one can be saved without that faith 
which the Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church holds y 
believes, and teaches, against which I grieve that I 
have greatly erred, inasmuch as I have held and believ* 
ed doctrines opposed to her teaching ; 



64 The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 



" I now, with grief and contrition for my past errors^ 
profess that I believe the Holy Catholic Apostolic 
Roman Church to be the only and true Church estab- 
lished on earth by Jesus Christ, to which I submit my- 
self with my whole heart. I believe all the articles 
that she proposes to my belief and I reject and con- 
demn all that she rejects and condemns, and I am 
ready to observe all that she comma?ids me. And 
especially, I profess that I believe : 

* 1 One only God in three divine Persons, distinct 
from, and equal to each other — that is to say, the 
Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost ; 

" The Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation, Passion. 
Death, and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ ; and 
the personal union of the two Natures, the divine and 
the human; the divine Maternity of the most holy 
Mary, together with her most spotless Virginity ; 

" The true, real, and substantial presence of the Body 
and Blood, together with the Soul and Divinity of our 
Lord Jesus Christ, in the most holy Sacrament of the 
Eucharist ; 

" The seven Sacraments instituted by Jesus Christ for 
the salvation of mankind ; that is to say, Baptism, 
Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, 
Order, Matrimony ; 

"Purgatory, the Resurrection of the dead, Everlast- 
ing life ; 

" The Primacy, not only of honor, but also of juris- 
diction, of the Roman Pontiff, successor of St. Peter % 
Prince of the Apostles, Vicar of Jesus Christ ; 

" The veneration of the Saints, and of their images; 

M The authority of the Apostolic and Ecclesiastical 
Traditions, and of the Holy Scriptures, which we must 
interpret and understand only in the sense which our 
holy mother the Catholic Church has held s and does 
hold ; 



The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 65 



"And everything else that has been defined, and 
declared by the sacred Canons, and by the general 
Councils, and particularly by the holy Council of Trent, 
and delivered, defined, and declared by the General 
Council of the Vatican, especially concerning the Pri- 
macy of the Roman Pontiff, and his infallible teaching 
authority. 

" With a sincere heart, therefore, and with unfeigned 
faith> I detest and abjure every error, heresy, and sect 
opposed to the said Holy Catholic and Apostolic 
Roman Church. So help me God, and these His holy 
Gospels, which I touch with my handy 

The preamble, in which it is stated that no 
one can be saved without the Catholic faith, and 
that the convert is ready to do what the Church 
commands, I shall discuss later on, when it will 
be better understood. At present we will con- 
fine ourselves to the definite articles proposed. 

In them you have the Catholic creed in all 
its principal points. There are some others 
naturally following from or connected with 
these ; but it is safe to say that none will give 
you difficulty if these do not. I shall, however, 
touch on some matters not directly mentioned 
here ; for it is not the desire of the Church to 
keep anything back ; the ' ' discipline of the 
secret,' ' mentioned above, though no doubt 
necessary in its day, is not observed at present. 

But no doubt some of the points given here 
may present some difficulty, and some you may 
misunderstand as you read them, either on 



66 The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 



account of the brevity with which they are ex- 
pressed, or because of the false notions about 
them which you may have entertained. Let us 
then look at them more carefully and see how 
much difficulty, if any, remains after our ex- 
amination. 

It is likely that some will ; especially as we 
shall not in these pages discuss matters very 
minutely, and you w r ill not have a chance to ask 
questions or propose doubts. I only want now 
to show you, if possible, that the Catholic faith 
is not such a monstrous or unreasonable thing 
as you may have imagined ; the only way to 
settle every question that may occur is to go to 
some priest, or if you cannot make up your 
mind to that, to consult some well-instructed 
Catholic ; but of course the priest is the best 
one to talk to, for he has made these matters his 
special study ; and he will probably be able to 
appoint some time to talk to you, if too busy 
just when you happen to call on him. You 
will probably find him to have more in common 
with yourself than you suppose, even though he 
may be a foreigner by birth ; and he w T ill very 
likely be an American citizen by birth, not 
merely by adoption ; and it is not so difficult to 
find a priest w r ho has been a Protestant, and 
who will understand, by his own experience, 
just what your ideas and your difficulties are. 

Now let us look at the articles of faith given 



The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 67 



above. The first is: "One only God in three 
divine Persons , distinct from, and equal to each 
other — that is to say, the Father, the Son, and the 
Holy Ghosts 

No doubt this is a doctrine which in itself 
presents difficulty ; it is a great mystery, one 
peculiar to the Christian faith, and one which 
we cannot hope to understand thoroughly, still 
less to convince ourselves of by reasoning. But 
then the difficulty which it presents is one to 
which probably you have been accustomed ; for 
almost all Christian denominations hold and 
teach this same doctrine. Protestantism made 
no protest on this point ; the Greek Church of 
course teaches it, arid so do all the churches of 
the East. So we need not consider it as an 
objection to the Catholic Church in particular; 
it would rather be so if she did not teach it ; 
and we may, in spite of the great importance of 
this doctrine, pass on to something else. 

Next we have "the Catholic doctrine of the 
Incarnation, Passion, Death, and Resurrection of 
our Lord fesus Christ. 9 ' 

Here again we have something substantially 
the same as what the great majority of Protest- 
ants maintain. I will state — though yery pro- 
bably you know already — what Incarnation 
means. It means simply that the Son of God, 
the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, 
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, took our human 



68 The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 



nature, and became man as well as God, in the 
person of our Lord Jesus Christ. Almost all 
Protestants, as I have" said, also believe this; 
but they are not alwa}^s very clear about just 
the time and the way in which this wonder 
ful work was accomplished. Some, I think, 
believe that the man Christ became divine only 
when the Holy Ghost descended on him at the 
time of his baptism. Some, perhaps, regard 
him to have been so at his birth, but not before. 
But the Apostles' Creed, which most Protest- 
ants recite or at least believe, is quite clear on 
this point. It says, " He was conceived by the 
Holy Ghost.' ' What does this mean, except 
that His conception in the womb of the Blessed 
Virgin Mary, His mother, was the occasion on 
which this wonderful ' ' Incarnation ' ' occurred ? 
And the Bible seems really quite plain in its 
teaching about this matter. 

However, as you see, there is no charge or 
protest against the Catholic Church about its 
teaching in this respect made by Protestants. 
The mass of them believe just as we do, that 
the Son of God became "incarnate" — that is, 
took human nature upon Himself in the womb 
of His Blessed Mother, at the time when the 
Angel Gabriel appeared to her, as narrated in 
the first chapter of St. Luke's Gospel. 

Now next as to the Passion of Christ. Of 
course this simply means His sufferings im- 



The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 69 



mediately previous to and in connection with 
His death; specially His crucifixion. But 
what is the meaning of saying that we hold this 
ias a doctrine ? For it is simply a well-estab- 
lished fact of history, is it not? Very few, 
certainly, doubt it. Both Jews and pagans 
bore, and still bear, testimony to it. 

The doctrine, then, of Christ's Passion and 
Death must be something different from the 
mere assertion of the fact that He suffered and 
died. And it is. The Catholic doctrine about 
it is not merely that Christ suffered and died, 
but that He suffered and died for us ; that by 
His suffering and death He accomplished a 
most wonderful work, making by means of it 
satisfaction for the sins of the whole world ; and 
not only making a satisfaction, but making the 
only satisfaction which ever has been, or ever 
will be, made for our sins ; so that it is in that 
suffering and death of His that all our hope 
must be placed. The Catholic doctrine of the 
Passion and Death of Christ is that Christ is our 
only Saviour and Redeemer ; that, as St. Peter 
says (Acts iv. 12), " there is no other name 
under heaven given to men whereby we must be 
saved. ' ' 

Well, here again, what charge would Protest- 
ants in general want to make against the 
Catholic Church? Every Christian who be- 
lieves that we need to be saved at all, believes 



70 The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 



that we must be saved by Christ's sufferings 
and death. 

You have been perhaps accustomed to be- 
lieve, you have been told, it may be, from 
your childhood, that we Catholics, or * 1 Roman- 
ists' ' as they sometimes call us, believe that it 
is our own good works that win heaven for us ; 
that we put the merits of Christ quite into the 
background. But you see this is a great 
mistake. Christ is our Saviour, and there is no 
other which can take His place ; this is nothing 
new which Martin Luther or any other Protest- 
ant brought to light ; it has been the Catholic 
teaching from the beginning. 

Next we have mention of the Resurrection of 
Christ. We perhaps need not say much about 
this, for though it is a miraculous event, in 
which we believe by faith, and not a simple 
matter of ordinary history, still the whole 
Christian world accepts it as a certainty. No 
Christian believes that Christ's body decayed 
like others in the tomb to which it was con- 
signed, or even that it was stolen away to follow 
the laws of nature in any other place, or to be 
otherwise disposed of by His disciples. The 
practically universal belief of all who call them- 
selves Christians is that, as recorded in all the 
gospels, Christ arose from the tomb in which 
His really dead body lay, on the Sunday morn- 
ing following His crucifixion; and that he 



The Principal Points of Catholic Faith, vi 



arose to die no more, but to live in the flesh a 
glorious and immortal life. 

They believe also that His risen body was 
not, as before, subject to pain, fatigue, or any 
of the ills of this life, and that it had qualities 
of a supernatural character, evident from the 
gospel narratives, which will be more fully ex- 
plained when we come to speak of the resurrec- 
tion of the dead. Here, then, the Catholic 
Church has no issue or trouble with any other 
Christian denominations, except with such who, 
while calling themselves Christians, reject the 
supernatural altogether from the life of Christ. 
We may, therefore, pass on, since, as has been 
said from the outset, we are not undertaking a 
formal defence of the Christian faith against 
other quite different religions, nor against in- 
fidelity and rationalism. 

What have we next? c< The personal union 
of the two Natures, the divine and the human 

This concerns a point of what may be called 
accurate theology, about which in these days 
people do not generally trouble themselves 
much. And it is not a point of real controversy 
at present among those who believe in the 
Divinity of Christ, though many have no doubt 
quite loose and unsettled notions on the subject. 

In the early days of the Church, however, 
there was a good deal of dispute about this 
matter. 



72 The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 



Some held that there was a double personal- 
ity in Christ ; two really distinct persons, one 
Divine, the other human, under the same bodily 
form. 

These were called Nestorians, from their 
leader, Nestorius, Archbishop of Constanti- 
nople. Their doctrine was condemned as false 
and heretical at the General Council of 
Ephesus, a.d. 431, and it disappeared for the 
most part from the Church, though there are 
some who profess it even to this day among the 
Christians of the far East. You may have seen 
the name in the papers ; their reunion with the 
Catholic Church was spoken of some time ago. 

This doctrine having been condemned, some 
went too far in the other direction, and main- 
tained that there was no human nature' in 
Christ ; that there was only one nature, as there 
was only one person. These were called Eu- 
tychians, from their leader Eutyches, a monk of 
Constantinople ; or more significantly Monophy- 
sites, a Greek w r ord signifying one nature {monos, 
one or single, and physis i nature). This belief 
was also declared to be contrary to the true 
faith in the General Council of Chalcedon, a.d. 
451, and it never prevailed to any great extent 
subsequently ; but as there are still some 
Nestorians, so also there are still some Mo- 
nophysites. The Copts of Egypt are such. * s 

But neither of these doctrines is formally 



The Principal Points of Catholic Faith. 73 



maintained by Christians, whether Catholic or 
Protestant, in Europe or America. All among 
us who believe in Christ's Godhead or Divinity, 
whether they be Catholic or Protestant, believe 
that Christ was both God and man, in one 
single personality. 

And indeed it is clear that, were it otherwise, 
His sufferings and death would not avail for our 
redemption, in the view of those who believe 
that redemption or atonement for our sins was 
needed. A merely human person could not 
suffice to make this atonement ; on the other 
hand, a human nature was needed in order that 
suffering and death might be possible. 

I think, then, that there are few so-called 
orthodox Protestants who will have any fault to 
find with the Catholic Church here; though 
such Protestants do not all see the consequences 
which naturally follow from this doctrine, as 
will be evident a little farther on. 

The next article is : ' ' the divine Maternity 
of the most holy Mary, together with her most 
spotless Virginity" Here we come to what 
seems to be a point at issue ; and we will give 
to it, and to the general teaching of the Church 
about the Blessed Virgin, a separate chapter. 



CHAPTER VII. 



THE BI/ESSED VIRGIN MARY. 

YVTHAT, then, is meant by these words— 
" "the divine Maternity of the most holy 
Mary " ? 

It is meant that she is truly and properly 
called, as the Catholic Church calls her, the 
Mother of God. This title was definitely given 
to her by the Council of Ephesus, of which I 
have just spoken, and is given to her by all 
Catholics in the pra}^er which we call the 
" Hail Mary." We say in that prayer : " Hail 
Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now 
and at the hour of our death." 

It is quite likely that you may object to this 
title, and be scandalized by it. But that is be- 
cause you do not rightly understand what it 
means. 

I remember seeing mention of it made in a 
Protestant catechism which I was once teaching 
in a Sunday-school. It spoke of this title as 
being a wrong one given by Romanists, and re- 
marked that the Virgin Mary was " Christ's 
mother only as to His human nature." 

This, of course, implied that " Romanists," or 
Catholics, regarded her as the mother of the 

74 



The Blessed Virgin Mary, 75 

Divine Nature. And this idea, I feel sure, is 
quite prevalent among Protestants about us. 

And yet the notion is so absurd a one that it 
hardly seems to bear discussion. How could 
there be a Mother of the Divine Nature ? Such 
an idea would at once make that Nature not 
Divine. For the Nature of God is necessarily 
self-existing, and from all eternity. It could 
not be Divine, and yet have a Mother. It 
would follow from this that we Catholics do not 
mean God when we use the word, and that the 
Blessed Virgin is our real God, if we have any 
at all, strictly speaking. 

And such, I am afraid, is the idea that many 
Protestants have of us. If they would only 
examine, they would see how false it is ; they 
would see that what we teach must be taught 
unless we wish to be Nestorians. 

They would see that no woman could be a 
mother of a nature simply. Any mother is the 
mother of a person, not merely of a nature. The 
person has a nature of course, but it is not mere- 
ly the nature which is born of the mother, but 
the person. 

Very well then. The Blessed Virgin Mary 
was the Mother of Christ ; that is granted by 
all. But Christ was a single person, having a 
Divine as well as a human nature ; this is ad- 
mitted by orthodox Protestants. And this per- 
son Christ is properly called Divine; that is 



j6 The Blessed Virgin Mary. 



also plain enough ; He is called simply God 
by Protestants themselves ; His personality is 
Divine. The Blessed Virgin was the one who 
brought God into the world ; and that is all that 
we mean by calling her the mother of God. The 
title was given, and is used, as a protest against 
the Nestorian heres} r that there were two per- 
sons, one Diviue and one human, and that only 
the human person was born into the world. 
Protestants need not worry themselves about it 
at all, for they hold just the same thing them- 
selves. 

It is, then, only in appearance that there is a 
point at issue here. But no doubt there is a 
real disagreement on some points about the 
Blessed Mother of God between Protestants and 
Catholics. 

For one thing, Protestants do not seem to like 
to call her " blessed," as Catholics regularly do. 
This is really strange on their part, for we find 
right down in their own Bible (Luke i. 48) 
''from henceforth all generations shall call me 
blessed." It is the same in ours too ; and now 
I will just remark that in the quotations I have 
made thus far from the Bible I have used the 
Catholic version, and shall continue to do so, as 
a rule, and this for several reasons; first, because 
we believe it to be the best ; secondly, that you 
may be quite sure that we have one in English ; 
and thirdly, that you may see how little differ- 



# 

The Blessed Virgin Mary. 77 



ence, on the whole, there is between it and the 
Protestant one. 

What reason have Protestants for objecting to 
do what the Bible says all generations will do ? 
It is really hard to see ; for even if the Mother 
of Christ was merely an ordinary woman like 
any other, certainly she was very fortunate and 
blessed in having for her Son the Redeemer of 
the world. 

I can see no reason, unless that they want to 
keep her down, as it were ; it looks as if they 
thought there was some danger of her being 
more highly honored than her Son", and that 
some sort of repression was called for. To 
Catholics this idea would never occur ; we 
would not think of comparing the Blessed 
Virgin with God ; highly exalted as we believe 
her to be among creatures, the same infinite 
gap always remains in our minds between her 
and God that must necessarily be between the 
creature and the Creator. 

Really this fear, this nervousness as it were, 
about a rivalry between the two, seems very 
amusing to us sometimes. I once knew a 
Protestant woman who on seeing a statue of the 
Blessed Virgin holding her Divine Infant in her 
arms, as she must so frequently have done, said 
that it 4 1 gave her a shiver to see the Virgin so 
large, and the Saviour so small"! Such a 
strange conceit could not occur to a Catholic. 



78 The Blessed Virgin Mary. 

Such representations only impress on us, as it 
seems that they naturally must upon all Chris- 
tians, the immense condescension of God in 
becoming a little child for our sake, and the 
great dignity He was pleased to confer on His 
Mother, and similarly on His foster-father St. 
Joseph, in being, as the Scripture says, "sub- 
ject to them " (L,uke ii. 51). 

But of course there is some difference be- 
tween the Catholic and Protestant teachings 
with regard to the Blessed Virgin, as I have 
said. Protestants, as a rule, I think, do regard 
her as simply in herself nothing but an ordinary 
woman; a good, pious, and holy woman, cer- 
tainly ; I hardly think they doubt that ; but 
still not in any way specially or distinctly su- 
perior to many others. I suppose they would 
all agree that she is in heaven ; but they do not 
look upon her as occupying any special or 
exalted place there. 

The reason, probably, for this really peculiar 
opinion of theirs — for it is peculiar, the Greek 
and all the Oriental churches having the 
Catholic view about her — is that they do not 
attach any weight to anything that is not right 
down in the text of the Bible. Sometimes, as 
in the instance I gave a little while ago, it 
really seems as if they did not notice very much 
some things that are in that text ; but at any 
rate, they do not go beyond it. This is in it- 



The Blessed Virgin Mary. 79 



self unreasonable ; it is something the same as 
if we admitted no evidence about the great men 
who founded our government except what could 
be obtained from the study of the Constitution. 
But this point has already been sufficiently dis- 
cussed ; and I trust you have seen that the 
Catholic belief that other evidence on doctrinal 
points is admissible is reasonable enough, to 
say the least. 

Admitting such evidence, it is plain enough 
that the Blessed Virgin did occupy in the mind 
of the Church a peculiar and [separate position 
from that of other saints and holy persons, from 
the first ages of Christianity. We find as 
strong things said about her when the Church 
came out of the pressure of persecution, and 
had a chance to fully publish her doctrine, as 
now. * We iind it constantly maintained that 
she was not only good, but even sinless ; and 
surely, though Protestants may not see how this 
can be established, at least none urge anything 
against it, or bring in any way against her any 
definite charge or blame of any kind ; and 
many of them even admit it, though not as '& 
matter of absolute belief or certainty. 

Then, again, there is a constant tradition that 
she was after her death taken bodily away 
from this world ; that as our Divine Lord as- 
cended corporally into heaven, so His Blessed 
Mother was taken up, or assumed there. This 



8o 



The Blessed Virgin Mary. 



event is celebrated in the feast of the Assump- 
tion, as we call it. And I would like to call 
your attention to the probability of this, from 
the fact that no one ever pretended to collect 
any relics of the Blessed Virgin, except of such 
a nature that she might have parted with them 
during life, and that no one has claimed or now 
claims that her body actually rests anywhere on 
earth. Such claims would undoubtedly have 
been made, had it been possible to make them ; 
for no one can suppose that the actual tomb of 
the body of one so intimately related to Christ 
would have been neglected by Christians, 01 
that they would not have collected what sou- 
venirs were attainable of one who must have 
been so dear to Him and to them. 

To say that her remains were hid away, as 
the Jews pretended that those of Christ were, 
would merely be saying that Romanism began 
very early, and was indeed identified with 
Christianity itself. But such an idea, either 
with regard to our Divine Lord or to His 
Blessed Mother, is really unreasonable ; no se- 
cret of such importance could be so well kept. 

However, it is not necessary to argue further 
to prove this point, or even to show that it is 
not improbable ; for it has never been defined 
as an article of Catholic faith, though it is uni- 
versally believed by Catholics. 

The other matter which is given in the pro- 



The Blessed Virgin Mary. 



81 



fession of faith which we are examining is the 
spotless or absolute Virginity of Mary. This is 
generally conceded by Christians, as all call 
her Virgin, though all do not prefix the title 
Blessed. The only questions w T hich could well 
be raised about it would be as to whether 
Christ Himself was the son of Joseph, and. 
whether He had any brothers or sisters, in the 
sense in which we would use the word. Both 
these ideas are rejected by orthodox Protest- 
ants, the brothers or sisters mentioned in the 
Gospel being understood to be merely near 
relatives. The Catholic faith, therefore, pre- 
sents no more difficulties in this matter than 
that of Protestants in general. 

There is another matter of faith, however, 
with regard to the Blessed Virgin Mary which 
should be explained, as it has been much mis- 
understood, and is of considerable importance. 
It has been often mentioned in these last few 
decades, especially since its solemn definition as 
an article of faith by Pius IX. in 1854, and you 
have probably often heard of it. It is what is 
known as the Immaculate Conception ; and on 
account of the special interest attaching to it, 
we will make it the subject of a special chapter. 



CHAPTER VIII. 



THK IMMACULATE CONCEPTION. 

THE particular dogma of the Church which 
we are about to consider seems to furnish 
a specially good illustration of a fact evident 
enough to Catholics ; that is, that most of the 
objections made by Protestants to our religion 
come from their not understanding what that 
religion really teaches. It is quite plain that 
hardly any of the objectors to the Immaculate 
Conception have any idea of what is meant by 
the words. 

Some seem to think that it refers to the su- 
pernatural conception of our Divine Lord in the 
womb of His Blessed Mother; and it seems 
certainly strange that with this notion they 
should object to it, for this doctrine is plainly 
laid down in the Apostles' Creed, which almost 
all Christians profess, in the words, u He was 
conceived by the Holy Ghost." It is also 
clearly taught in the Bible itself (L,uke ii. 35) . 

Others, again, see in it a sort of deification of 

the Blessed Virgin herself; they think that it 

means to say that she is in some way equal to 

God ; though why they should entertain this 

idea seems to us quite strange. It is only to be 

82 



The Immaculate Conception. 83 

accounted for by their having that notion firmly 
fixed in their minds already, so that anything 
which appears to point in that direction tends to 
increase or intensify that conviction. 

Others still, paying somewhat closer attention 
to the words as they stand, gather from them 
the meaning that the Church regards the con- 
ception of Mary as supernatural in the same 
sense in which that of her Divine Son was ; 
that we believe that she too was - ' conceived by 
the Holy Ghost.' ' They think, then, that if it 
does not mean that she was actually divine, it 
certainly must mean that she is in some way 
more than human; a goddess in some sense, 
though not perhaps equal to God Himself. 

How strange it is that they will never take 
the trouble to inquire of some one who really 
knows what this doctrine is, or to get some 
book which would give them information. If 
they would do so, they would find, very likely, 
that their objections would disappear; at any 
rate, it would seem to them a small addition to 
what they are already willing enough to accept. 

What, then, is this doctrine? In the first 
place, it is not any raising of the Mother of God 
above the plane of human nature. The Church 
does not mean by the words ' ' Immaculate Con- 
ception ' 1 that Mary was conceived by the Holy 
Ghost; on the contrary, she teaches that she 
was conceived and born of human parents ; her 



84 The Immaculate Conception. 



father's name is believed to have been Joachim, 
her mother's Anna. All that is meant is that 
she was not only from the time of her birth, but 
from the moment j)f her conception, a perfectly- 
innocent or sinless child. 

That is no more than what many Christians 
believe is the case with every child that comes 
into this world. And of course the Church 
thinks so too, if by sin is meant actual sin; that 
is to say, sin actually committed by thought, 
word, or deed. For it is plain that no child can 
commit sin before coming to an age when it 
becomes aware of the difference between right 
and wrong ; the age of reason, as we commonly 
call it. 

But there is another thing which is known as 
sin, besides that which is actually committed ; 
it is what is called original sin, and this also is 
believed in by orthodox Protestants as well as 
by Catholics. What is meant by it is this : 
that Adam in his sin, as narrated in the book 
of Genesis, lost the right to heaven; and that 
from that time — that is, from the very beginning 
of our race — his descendants have also lost that 
title to heaven. A Redeemer, however, was 
promised immediately after Adam's sin, who 
was to restore the right to heaven which had 
been lost ; and Christians generally acknow- 
ledge that it will be restored to those who be- 
lieve in Him. Furthermore* Catholics and 




The Immaculate Conception. 85 



many Protestants believe that it is restored even 
to infants incapable of belief by their being 
baptized. 

Now, what the Church teaches with regard to 
the Blessed Virgin is simply this : that to her, 
by a special privilege, on account of her having 
been selected as the Mother of the Redeemer, 
this right to heaven was restored even before 
her birth, at the very instant of her conception ; 
that what we call the stain of original sin never 
was upon her. That is what the word "im- 
maculate" means. Macula, in I^atin, means a 
stain or spot; " immaculate/ ' then, means free 
from stain ; and to say ' ' Immaculate Concep- 
tion' * simply means, then, that her human 
nature was free at its very conception from this 
stain or spot of sin, being in that respect like 
that of her Divine Son. But this does not for a 
moment imply that she had any Divine Nature, 
as her Son had ; nor does any Catholic dream 
of understanding it in that way. 

Now, what objection can possibly attach to 
this, except that no positive proof of it may ap- 
pear ? No reason can be stated why it should 
not have been so ; there is no impiety or idola- 
try in it. Of course, if one is to take nothing as 
belonging to the Christian faith but what is 
plainly or unquestionably stated in the Bible, 
one will not believe or accept it ; but if one will 
leave this, which I think has been fairly shown 



86 The Immaculate Conception. 



in what precedes to be unreasonable ground, 
there is hardly anything in which the consent 
of the Christian world previous to the Protes- 
tant Reformation, or since that outside of the 
influence of that Reformation, has been more 
unanimous. The Greek and other Oriental 
churches do not formally state it ; but it is quite 
safe to say that their members would not and 
do not reject it, for the devotion to the Blessed 
Virgin has been, if anything, greater with them 
than even in the Roman Church. And the 
question about it among Catholics, which did 
exist before the solemn definition in 1854, was 
not so much whether it was a true doctrine, 
but rather whether it was a matter, properly 
speaking, of the faith ; or whether the original 
stain did not rest for an instant, as it were, on 
Mary, being removed the instant afterward ; 
attaching to her, as we may say, purely as a 
matter of form. These doubts were not very 
grave ones, and all were probably glad to have 
them removed. 

Try, then, to clear away the prejudices and 
imaginations which you may have entertained 
about this very simple matter, and if you do 
not agree with us and the great majority of 
Christendom about it, do not think that we are 
idolaters because we think as we do. 



CHAPTER IX. 



THE HOIvY KUCHARIST. 

THE next article which we find in our pro- 
fession is as follows : ' ' the true, real, and 
substantial presence of the Body and Blood, together 
with the Soul and Divinity, of our Lord Jesus 
Christ, in the most holy Sacrament of the Eu- 
charist. 

In this we have the statement of one of the 
great mysteries of the faith; one which, as I 
have said, was in the beginning kept a profound 
secret, so far as possible, from the world outside 
the Christian pale, and only communicated to 
those who had been received into it. At pres- 
ent, and for a long time past, the discipline has 
been different ; it is now explained, as far as it 
can be, to all who desire to know it ; and yet 
very many, as did the Jews in the time of our 
L,ord Himself, misunderstand and misrepre- 
sent it. 

Perhaps this is not so much to be wondered 
at ; for it is, of course, a matter impossible for 
us here to thoroughly understand. But that 
should only dispose us to try to understand it 
better ; for that it is taught by our blessed Lord 
Himself quit** explicitly, cannot be denied. 

87 



88 



The Holy Eucharist. 



Please turn in your Bible to the sixth chapter 
of St. John's Gospel. I will quote here from 
your own version, for that you will not gainsay. 
We read in verse 51: ' 1 1 am the living bread 
which came down from heaven ; if any man eat 
of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the 
bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will 
give for the life of the world." 

The Jews who heard Him, as I have said, ' 
misunderstood this, and were shocked at it. 
They said (v. 52), " How can this man give us 
his flesh to eat ? 

Now, Protestants generally say that our Lord 
only meant this figuratively; that He did not 
mean that any one was to receive Him sub- 
stantially, but only to commune with Him in a 
spiritual manner. And indeed we agree that it 
is only the spiritual union with Him that is of 
use ; the merely material or corporal reception 
of His body would be of no avail, as we read 
below (v. 63). But if there was, after all, to be 
no actual reception of Him corporally, He 
could easily have removed all their objections 
by saying at once that a spiritual communion 
was* all that was intended. But instead of this, 
He goes on (v. 53): "Verily, verily, I say 
unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of 
man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in 
you.'' If what He had said was merely a 
metaphor, why not explain it away ; but no, He 



The Holy Eucharist. 89 



goes on to state it even more strongly than 
before. 

Why should He do this, if not to show un- 
mistakably that there really was to be a 
mysterious substantial reception of Him, im- 
parting great spiritual blessings which could 
not otherwise be received ; having for its object 
these spiritual blessings, but requiring this 
means for their attainment ? And, if his hear- 
ers had all accepted all that Protestants say 
was meant — and certainly any one who believed 
in Him even as a good and holy man might do 
that, there being now no other mystery than 
this definitely proposed as a test of their faith — 
why should He say, " there are some of you that 
believe not" (v. 64)? And why should some 
of them actually ' ' go back and walk no more 
with him" (v. 66) except that they, like Protest- 
ants, felt that this mystery about the reception 
of His flesh and blood was something too hard 
for them to accept ? It could hardly have been 
the allusion to His death or to His ascension 
which drove them away. These were not the 
points against which they had protested. 

But after all, we must not get into contro- 
versy. I only want to call your attention to this 
matter, and have you think of it yourselves. 

We all know that this mystery was afterward 
Still more solemnly proclaimed by our Saviour 
when, at the Last Supper, He took bread, as all 



90 • The Holy Eucharist. 



the evangelists except St. John record, and said, 
"This is my body," and wine, saying, "This 
is my blood/ 1 and told them to receive these, 
and to continue to do what He had then done, 
in remembrance of Him. 

Here again, of course, I know it is said that 
His words were only to be taken in a spiritual 
sense ; that He meant ' ' This represents my 
body, or my blood," and nothing more. 

Perhaps ; but if so, is it not rather strange 
that He should have allowed them to misunder- 
stand Him, as they seem certainly to have done? 
Even if it is claimed that the Apostles and first 
Christians had the present views of Protestants 
about this matter, it must be conceded that the 
words of Christ were understood literally very 
soon afterward; that this literal sense is 
brought forward and insisted on repeatedly by 
the Christian writers of early times, and that 
there is no trace of any protest against it up to 
the times of the Reformation. Christendom 
seems to have been more singularly in accord 
about this matter than about any other; the 
quarrels and controversies of the growing 
Church did not concern it ; all agreed and took 
for granted that Christ was really present in the 
Holy Communion, or Eucharist, of which all 
partook ; that the consecrated bread and wine 
became indeed and in truth His Body and His 
Blood. 



The Holy Eucharist. 91 



It seems hardly credible that Almighty God 
should have allowed such a gigantic delusion to 
fasten itself on the Church in its very cradle, and 
to remain in it for fifteen centuries, inducing all 
Christians to the worship of bread and wine. 
One word from Christ Himself at the beginning 
would so easily have stopped it ; and afterward 
some one, at least, could have been raised up 
by the Holy Spirit to protest against it. 

But so far was this from being the case that 
even I^uther himself, the great apostle of the 
Reformation, believed in it as firmly as any 
one else, as did also many others who protested 
against Rome. Zwingle, however, does raise his 
voice against it ; but his doctrine is looked on 
with horror by his fellow- Reformers, so deeply 
has the belief in the Real Presence of Christ in 
the consecrated elements become embedded in 
the very structure of Christianity. 

It is true that doubts in a certain way had 
been raised about this matter about three cen- 
turies previous, principally by Berengarius. But 
these doubts did not concern the Real Presence 
itself, but rather the way in which the Church 
held this doctrine. There were doubts about 
what is called ' ' transubstantiation ' ' (what this 
is will soon be explained) ; but they never took 
any real hold on the belief of the faithful, and 
were repudiated later even by Berengarius him- 
self. 



9 2 



The Holy Eucharist, 



It is time now that we should understand 
more clearly just what the Catholic faith does 
teach on this head. 

It is, then, that Christ not only in the Last 
Supper made Himself really and truly present 
in what He gave to His Apostles at that time, 
when He said ''Take, eat; this is my body," 
and ' ' Drink ye all of it ; this is my blood of 
the new testament 5 ' (Matt. xxvi. 26-28, and 
similarly Mark xiv. 23-24 and Luke xxii. 
19-20), but that He also empowered them to re- 
peat the same thing which He had done, as 
indeed distinctly stated by St. Luke, "this do 
in remembrance of me" (xxii. 19). 

That this rite has been celebrated from the 
very foundation of Christianity is unquestion- 
able ; and in fact all Protestant denominations 
have retained it. It has also been generally, 
indeed almost universally, allowed that a quali- 
fied minister of some sort was needed for this 
sacred rite ; that it was not a thing to be under- 
taken by any believer in general. So it is plain 
that Christians have never held that this was 
something to be done only by the Apostles 
themselves, during their lifetime ; but that 
there were to be others to whom this office 
should be transmitted. 

The Catholic faith holds that those who have 
succeeded in this respect to the office of the 
Apostles are the bishops and priests of the 



The Holy Eucharist. 



93 



Church. To perform this rite has been always 
regarded as the principal essential office of the 
priest. 

He performs it in what is manifestly the 
principal service of the Catholic Church; 
what we call the Mass; this corresponds to 
what Protestant denominations generally call 
the Communion service. 

The Mass consists first of various prayers, 
with the reading of a part of one of the Epistles, 
and of one of the Gospels of the New Testa- 
ment. This portion varies according to the day 
of the ecclesiastical calendar, or the feast which 
is being celebrated . Then follows the offering 
of the bread and wine which are to be conse- 
crated; and then comes the more solemn part 
of the service, in which the consecration of the 
bread and the wine is made, using the sane 
words which Christ Himself used at the I,ast 
Supper, as recorded in the Gospels. The con- 
secrated elements are elevated for a moment for 
the adoration of the people ; then follow some 
other prayers, after which the priest receives 
Communion, which is afterward distributed to 
such of those present as may come forward for 
it. After a few more prayers, and the blessing 
of the priest given to those present, the cere- 
mony is concluded. 

Now what do we hold is accomplished by the 
consecration ? We hold that the substance of 



94 The Holy Eucharist. 

the bread and wine which has been offered passes 
away, though the qualities, or "accidents" 
as they are called, remain, such, for example, as 
the shape, color, taste, etc. For the substance 
of the bread is substituted that of the Body of 
Christ ; for the substance of the wine, that of 
His Blood. 

To explain accurately what is meant by sub- 
stance would require some knowledge of meta- 
physics ; but I think every one can see that 
there is such a thing, and that it is different 
from the form which this substance may 
assume. When the substance takes a new 
form, we call the change transformation ; when 
the substance itself changes, the form remain- 
ing the same, it is naturally called transubstan- 
tiation. 

I have said that I^uther himself taught that 
Christ was really present in the consecrated 
elements ; the divergence of his doctrine from 
that of the Church was that he maintained that 
the substance of the bread and wine remained 
together with that of the Body and Blood of 
Christ. His doctrine was therefore known as 
con substantiation. But both agreed, you see, as 
to the Real Presence of Christ. 

The Church further teaches that the Real 
Presence of Christ remains as long as the form 
remains uncorrupted ; when, however, that 
becomes changed — as, for instance, if the taste 



The Holy Eucharist. 95 

of the consecrated wine should become sour, so 
that it would no longer be considered as wine 
but as vinegar — the Real Presence would no 
longer remain. But as the form does always 
remain unchanged for a considerable time, un- 
less the elements are received in Communion, it 
is clear that we cannot do otherwise than recog- 
nize the Real Presence of Christ in them by the 
same signs of adoration which we should give 
to Christ if He were visibly present. 

Now, in this it may be said we are mistaken ; 
that the Real Presence of Christ is not in this 
which appears to be bread and wine, any more 
than it is anywhere else. But it cannot be 
justly said that we are idolaters by any one 
who believes in the Divinity of Christ, any 
more than it could be said that we were if we 
paid this honor to Him when concealed in any 
other way. If He were here with His bodily 
form as He was during His earthly life, we 
should, be justified, nay required, to pay Him 
this honor and worship under whatever disguise 
He might choose to conceal Himself, if we 
believed He was really there ; and it is exactly 
the same in this case. 

You w^ll easily see that there are great 
mysteries attached to this doctrine, especially 
that of the Real Presence existing in so many 
places at once ; do not imagine that we do not 
see these difficulties, though Catholic philoso- 



96 



The Holy Eucharist. 



phy does much to remove them. But so there 
are inscrutable mysteries connected with the 
doctrine of the Holy Trinity, Three Persons in 
One God. But the mystery exists because the 
doctrine is beyond our reason, not because it is 
contrar}^ to it. 

For it must not be imagined with regard to 
this doctrine of the Real Presence that it is 
opposed to any of the conclusions of science ; 
with regard to the constitution of material 
things, for instance. We accept without diffi- 
culty all that science has really established 
about this, though all scientific men will ac- 
knowledge that most of what they have to say 
about this is of the nature of hypothesis, not of 
discovered truth. And there is really no possi- 
bility of any physical inquiries ever clashing 
with the faith in this matter. For the notion 
of substance is not a physical, but a metaphysi- 
cal one, independent of physical researches. 

We may then dismiss all such fears. The 
only point we have really to consider is whether 
this teaching is historically identified with the 
Christian teaching itself; and, as has been said, 
only one answer can be given to this question. 
If any doctrine was held clearly and persistently 
from the earliest ages down to the time of the 
Reformation, it is this ; and if a different doc- 
trine had been held by the Apostles and their 
immediate followers, it would have been as 



2 he Holy Eucharist. 



97 



utterly impossible to introduce a tremendous 
innovation like this without protest of which 
we should now have some record, as it would 
be to introduce this doctrine now into some 
Protestant denomination without exciting con- 
troversy. There is, then, no alternative between 
accepting it and denying that anything definite 
in the way of Christian faith was handed down 
at all by the Apostles to those who listened to 
their teaching ; and I am presuming all along 
that you do not hold this latter view. 

It is also most clearly taught in the Bible 
itself, as we have seen; more clearly, indeed, 
than the doctrine of the Holy Trinity itself. 

It remains to say a few words on another 
aspect which the Mass has in the mind of the 
Catholic Church. 

We read in the first Epistle of St. Paul to the 
Corinthians (xi. 26), "As often as ye eat this 
bread and drink this ci^p, ye do shew the Lord's 
death till he come." These words are, as it 
were, an explanation of those of Christ Hint- 
self in which He says that this is to be done in 
remembrance of Him. In remembrance, that is, 
not merely in a general or affectionate way, but 
in remembrance of His great work, the shed- 
ding of His Blood on the cross for our sins. 

It is this that is signified by the double form 
under which the consecration is made. The 
bread, as even Protestants hold, represents His 



98 



The Holy Eucharist. 



Body ; the wine, His Blood, separated or shed 
from His Body. 

Now, the Catholic Church holds that though 
by the consecrating words Christ's Body is 
really present in the form of bread, and His 
Blood in that of wine, still they cannot now be 
actually separated. St. Paul tells us : " Christ 
f>eing raised from the dead, dierti no more ; 
death hath no more dominion over Him." His 
Blood cannot be really shed again. Where His 
Body is, then, there is His Blood , where His 
Blood is, there is His Body. So under each 
form or species Christ is wholly present, living, 
and both God and man ; as our profession says, 
"the Body and Blood, together with the Soul 
and Divinity , '; not each by itself separately, 
but all together. 

Nevertheless by the outward sign of separa- 
tion furnished by the double form or appear- 
ance, His sacrifice and Blood-shedding on the 
Cross is represented ; and thus we hold that in 
the Mass, His Sacrifice made once for all upon 
the Cross is represented ancj. offered in a spe- 
cialty efficacious way. This is the great sacri- 
ficial service of the New L,aw, foretold by the 
Prophet Malachi (i. n) : "From the rising of 
the sun even to the going down of the same my 
name shall be great among the Gentiles ; and in 
every place incense shall be offered unto my 
name, and a pure offering,' ' This sacrifice is 



The Holy Eucharist. 99 



also foreshadowed in that of Melchisedech, who 
" brought forth bread and wine, and he was the 
priest of the most high God" (Gen. xiv. 18) ; 
and St. Paul says (Heb. xiii. 10) : " We have 
an altar, whereof they have no right to eat 
which serve the tabernacle.' ' Remember this is 
not a new sacrifice, different from that of Christ ; 
that is the one sacrifice, which those of the Jews 
represented, and which alone has~ power to 
atone for our sins. It is the commemoration 
and the offering of that one sacrifice which we 
have in the Mass ; and it is for that reason that 
the Church attaches such great importance 
to it. 

Now one thing more. You know, perhaps, 
that in Communion, whether received at Mass 
or at some other time, lay people with us do not 
partake of the cup or chalice, but receive only 
under the form of bread. Protestants complain 
that this is only receiving half of the Commu- 
nion to which they are entitled ; but it is clear 
from what was said a little while ago that Christ 
must necessarily be entirely received under each 
ldnd, as He must be really present in each, it 
not being possible that He should be divided. 
There is, then, nothing more to be received by 
taking both, and to consider it necessary to give 
or receive both would imply a doubt as to the 
full presence of Christ in each. The matter, 
then, is not important in this respect, as long as 
LofC. 



lOO The Holy Eucharist. 

the DeatH of Christ is fully represented by the 
consumption of both when Mass is said; and 
for this purpose both species are received by 
the priest. But this is not a personal privilege; 
should he receive when not himself caying 
Mass, he receives, like the laity, the form of 
bread alone. 

The matter is one of discipline ; and the rule 
had to be made as it now stands, on account of 
the impossibility of the large numbers of people 
who go to Communion in the Catholic Church 
receiving the form of wine without danger of 
spilling, or of contamination in passing from 
mouth to mouth. 

Perhaps you think, by the way, that there 
are not so many people after all who do go to 
Communion in the Catholic Church. This is 
because you do not go early enough to the 
church to see them. Few go at a late Mass, 
because we have a law that one must take no 
food or drink at all from midnight till the time 
of receiving. This law is made for the sake of 
due reverence. So all that can do so naturally 
go to Communion early. Go to a Catholic 
church at six or seven o'clock of a Sunday 
morning, and you will see quite enough to 
satisfy you. 



CHAPTER X e 



THK SKVEN SACRAMENTS. 

OUR next article is : " The seven Sacraments 
instituted by Jesus Christ for the salvation 
of mankind ; that is to say, Baptism, Confirma- 
tion, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, 
Order, Matrimony." 

The principal difference between the Catholic 
doctrine and that of Protestants on the point 
here proposed is that we admit seven sacra- 
ments, while they usually admit two, and only 
two; namely, Baptism and Eucharist or Holy 
Communion, if indeed they have not come to 
regard these as merely appropriate ceremonies, 
in spite of what our Eord says, Mark xvi. 16 
and John vi. 54. And yet sometimes they are 
not very clear about this. In the Episcopal 
catechism, found in the Book of Common 
Prayer, we find as an answer to the question 
how many sacraments there are, "Two only, 
as generally necessary to salvation.' ' That, 
you see, is entirely non-committal. Being 
necessary to salvation really has nothing to do 
with the essence of a sacrament. It is possible 
to be saved without any sacrament at all ; other- 
wise no one could have been saved before the 

101 — . 



102 The Seven Sacraments. 



sacraments were instituted by Christ. And 
even now it is possible to be saved without 
any of the sacraments ; even Baptism itself is 
not absolutely necessary; for one who knows 
nothing about it, or has no one to baptize him, 
can be saved if he has perfect sorrow for sin, 
and turns to God with his whole heart, desiring 
and purposing to 'do all things which He has 
commanded. 

What, then, is the idea of a sacrament, or what 
is its true definition ? It is a rite or ceremony 
permanently instituted by Christ, for the purpose 
of signifying some grace from God, and confer- 
ring that grace on the soul. The first question, 
then, as to whether some rite or ceremony is a 
sacrament, is whether it was ordained by Christ ; 
the second, whether it was instituted to signify 
some special grace, and to confer that grace on 
all receiving it. 

Now, Protestants, on account of the principle 
which they generally hold that no certain 
information can be obtained as to what Christ 
did except from the Scripture, have evidently 
exposed themselves to the risk of missing some 
of the sacraments. And though the grace 
which the lost sacraments confer may not be 
one necessary to salvation, still it would be a 
pity to lose it, all the same. So it would be 
well, in this matter especially, to be pretty sure 
that there is no source outside the Bible from 



The Seven Sacraments, 103 

which we can get information as to what Christ 
established to be done in His Church for the 
spiritual benefit of those in it, or those desiring 
to come in. r 

It may be remarked, however, that it seems 
pretty clear that on the authority of Scripture 
alone at least two sacraments more should be 
admitted. For we read (John xx. 22, 23) : 
" When he had said this, he breathed on them ; 
and he said to them : Receive ye the Holy 
Ghost ; whose sins you shall forgive, they are 
forgiven them ; and whose sins you shall retain, 
they are retained.' ' Now, here is a definite 
institution by Christ of a great grace which His 
disciples — those, that is, who were present on 
this occasion — were to confer on others, namely, 
the forgiveness of their sins ; and also there is an 
institution by Him of a certain class of persons 
to exercise this power, or to confer this grace, 
by which they were set apart from the rest of 
the Christian community. 

It would seem, then, plainly here that we have 
the Sacrament of Penance, or of the absolution 
of sin by human ministers ; and also that of 
Order, or the setting apart of a certain order or 
class of persons among His followers who were 
to confer the Sacrament of Penance. And there 
is also full as much evidence from the text of 
the Bible that this was to be a permanent Chris- 
tian institution as there is for the Sacrament of 



104 



The Seven Sacraments. 



Baptism. For that, too, when He committed it 
to His Apostles (Matt, xxviii. 19), " Going, 
therefore, teach ye all nations, baptizing them 
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
of the Holy Ghost,'' was given, as it stands, 
merely as a personal charge ; He did not say 
that others were to do it after them. He said, 
it is true, that He would always be with them, 
even to the end of the world (v. 20) ; but it 
would be giving a strange sense to these words 
to suppose that they only applied to the . offices 
of baptizing and teaching ; and as nothing 
similar is recorded in connection with the Holy 
Communion, the want of it would imply that 
that also was only a temporary institution. 

Another contradiction shows itself in the doc- 
trine of Protestants in their not admitting the 
washing of the feet (recorded by St. John xiii. 
3-15) as a sacrament; for on the authority of 
Scripture alone it has as definite a blessing or 
grace attached to it, and is as distinctly enjoined 
by Christ, as Baptism or Hofy Communion. For 
He said to Peter (v. 8) : " If I wash thee not, 
thou shalt have no part with me," and He says 
(v. 14): "If then I, being your I^ord and 
Master, have washed your feet, you ought also 
to wash one another's feet." 

On the face, then, of Scripture, this washing 
of the feet is a matter seemingly of great im- 
portance, conferring a great blessing, and cer- 



The Seven Sacraments. 105 



tainly established by Christ ; and yet Protestants 
have no ceremony of the kind, though it exists 
in the Catholic Church, being one of the cere- 
monies of Holy Week. Catholics, however, do 
not regard it as a sacrament ; but there is no 
way of deciding that it is not so, unless we are 
willing to be guided by something besides the 
mere text of Scripture itself. 

And, in point of fact, Protestants have been so 
guided. They did not take this to be a sacra- 
ment, and why ? Simply because there was no 
evidence that it had ever been so regarded in 
the Church. If, then, they were so willing to 
take the Church's decision against this being a 
sacrament, though the Bible seems to say that 
it is, why not also accept the decision of the 
Church that Confirmation, evidently practised 
by the Apostles (Acts viii. 14-17 and xix. 
2-6), and Extreme Unction (described by St. 
James v. 14-15) are sacraments instituted by 
Christ, though the Scripture does not say that 
they were ? 

It would seem that we are, in this matter at 
least, in a mannei forced to leave the purely 
Scriptural ground on which Protestants claim 
to stand, and follow the more reasonable course 
of admitting other evidence as well ; and if we 
do so, we find at once that the seven Sacraments 
above named have been accepted from the earli- 
est ages of Christianity from which we can 



106 The Seven Sacraments. 



collect evidence ; that they are accepted by all 
the Christian churches through the world ex- 
cept those formed at the time of the Protestant 
Reformation. Why, then, have such difficulty 
about accepting them ? There is nothing idola- 
trous or superstitious in the idea of them, unless 
there be also in Baptism and Holy Communion. 

Of the Sacrament of Penance I shall have 
something to say later, as this matter is much 
misunderstood by Protestants, and notions are 
entertained by them about it which would cer- 
tainly imply great reproach to the Church if 
they were only true. Some remarks will also 
be made about some of the others, especially in 
stating the Catholic doctrine relating to mar- 
riage or matrimony. At present it suffices to 
state what we believe to be the graces attached 
to these seven Sacraments, as we hold them. 
These graces, then, are: 

1. For Baptism, by which one becomes a 
Christian, to remit all sin, original and actual, 
and the penalty of sin, to enlighten the mind, to 
diminish concupiscence or the desire for sin, 
and to make the soul fruitful of good works. 

2. For Confirmation, to strengthen Christians 
to profess and maintain their faith courageously. 

3. For the Eucharist, to nourish the Christian 
life, to increase grace, to produce a distaste for 
merely worldly things, and to draw the soul to 
union with God. 



The Seven Sacraments. 107 



4. For Penance, to remit sins committed after 
Baptism, and to give strength for avoiding sin, 
and persevering in a good life. 

5. For Extreme Unction, to remove the re- 
mains of sin, to relieve the souls of the sick, to 
increase confidence in God, to give strength to 
resist temptation, and to enable illness to be 
supported with patience ; and sometimes to cure 
the disease and restore health, if it be God's will. 

6. For Order, to make the ministers of Christ 
fit for their sacred duties, to perform them with 
due piety. This sacrament has various degrees ; 
those ordained are bishops, priests, and dea- 
cons. The priest has the power, by this sacra- 
ment, of consecrating the Eucharist, and of ab- 
solving sins ; besides this, the bishop has those 
of giving the sacrament of Confirmation, and 
of ordaining priests, and consecrating priests to 
be bishops. 

7. For Matrimony, to restrain inordinate con- 
cupiscence, to give strength to bear the burdens 
of married life, to keep conjugal fidelity, and to 
bring up children religiously and well. 

These, then, are the seven Sacraments, 
honored and accepted by the Catholic Church, 
and in constant use within her pale- Can it be 
said that, if they really are what she claims 
them to be, they are anything but great bless- 
ings and mercies of God? If indeed the 
Church taught that the gifts which they bestow 



io8 The Seven Sacraments. 



could be obtained without any proper disposi- 
tions on the part of the recipient ; that the for- 
giveness of sin could be obtained, for instance, 
in the Sacrament of Penance, without any 
sorrow for sin or purpose of avoiding it ; then 
indeed they would encourage Christians to 
neglect virtue, and trust to the sacraments 
simply as a means of escaping the consequences 
of the sins they might commit. 

But, in point of fact, the Church most dis- 
tinctly teaches, and Catholics know very well, 
that to obtain the blessings or graces of the 
majority of them, it is necessary to be, before 
attempting to receive them, in what is called 
the state of grace; that is to say, that one's 
sins must have been already forgiven, that one 
must be leading a good life, avoiding sin most 
carefully, and loving God with one's whole 
heart ; and that to approach them while living 
a sinful life, to receive Communion, for example, 
while still attached to sin and willing to commit 
it, would not only utterly deprive the sacrament 
of any blessing for the recipient, but would 
make his act in receiving it a frightful sin of 
sacrilege ; that is, it would be a profanation of 
most sacred things ; as we read in St. Paul's 
first epistle to the Corinthians (xi. 29) : "He 
that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and 
drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning 
the body of the Lord." 



The Seven Sacraments. 109 



For Christians even to marry without being 
in the state of grace is, therefore, regarded by 
the Church as a mortal sin of sacrilege ; and to 
avoid this they are required to go to Confession 
before the wedding. 

For the two sacraments, Baptism and Pen- 
ance, which are intended for the forgiveness of 
sin, it is not expected, of course, that one's sins 
will be forgiven before approaching them. But 
it is expected and required that if these sacra- 
ments are to produce the effect of the forgive- 
ness of actual sin, that sin must be repented of, 
and a firm determination made to avoid it for 
the future. 

A word may be said about the Sacrament of 
Extreme Unction. As you see by what has 
been said above, the effect of this, as far as sin 
is concerned, is to remove, not sin itself but its 
remains ; for though sin is forgiven in the 
Sacrament of Penance, so that the sinner passes 
into the state of grace or the love of God, still 
his soul is not restored to quite the same con- 
dition, unless he have extraordinary penitence, 
that it would have been in had he not sinned. 

You may, however, have noticed that the 
priest does not hesitate to give this Sacrament, 
or, as we say, to anoint, in cases where Catho- 
lics even of rather careless lives are struck 
down by some accident or sudden disease, de- 
priving them of their senses. The explanation 



no The Seven Sacraments. 



of this is, that where the Sacrament of Penance 
is impossible, it is held that this takes its place ; 
but here, as for Penance itself, it is not con- 
sidered to have any effect unless the sinner has 
interiorly made an act of true sorrow or re- 
pentance, which is necessarily accompanied by 
the purpose of abandoning sin for the future. 

In short, we do not hold that the sacraments 
have the effect of converting sinners or restor- 
ing them to the state of grace and the favor of 
God without their own co-operation by a thorough 
and hearty repentance. 

But, it may be asked, what is the use of these 
sacraments which confer the pardon of sin if 
they require repentance also ? With regard to 
Baptism, I will say now that it takes away 
original sin, which has been already explained, 
even from infants, and from idiots who have 
always been incapable of making a rational act ; 
and furthermore that it is by Baptism that we 
become Christians and capable of receiving the 
other sacraments, which are offered only to the 
baptized. There is, however, more to be said 
on this matter ; and it will be said when I come 
to speak more specially about the subject of 
confession, later on. 



CHAPTER XL 



PURGATORY. 

rlVERYBODY knows that Catholics believe 
J_4 in purgatory, but few outside the Church 
seem to have a clear notion of what we mean by 
it. Many apparently think that we believe that 
all Catholics are saved, but that they all, ex- 
cept perhaps the priests, have to go to purga- 
tory, out of which the priest will get them by his 
prayers, or by ceremonies of some sort, if he is 
only paid enough money for doing so. 

Now try to put yourself in our place for a 
moment. Think how you would feel if we 
made these sweeping charges against you. Is 
it possible that any one who recognizes the 
principles of morality, and who has common 
sense, could believe that a man or woman can 
be saved by simply professing the Catholic 
faith ? I am sorry to say that it is a matter of 
history that IyUther and the original Protestants 
who followed him did hold that we are saved 
by faith alone, and that the more we sin, the 
more we glorify this saving faith; and this idea, 
nominally, exists at the present day among 
those who have inherited the first creeds of the 
Reformation. But still all practically acknowl- 

XII 



112 



Purgatory. 



edge that to give proof of being a Christian in- 
deed, one should live a good life ; that this is 
the natural result of saving faith. And Catho- 
lics have always held this more formally and 
distinctly, teaching, as the Bible teaches, that 
nothing defiled can enter heaven ; and hence, of 
course, that if a Catholic, no matter how strong 
his faith may be, commits mortal sin, and dies 
without sincerely repenting of it, he goes in- 
fallibly to hell. The principal practical differ- 
ence between us and you is that we are more 
strict as to what constitutes mortal or grievous 
sin ; for instance, we believe that to give way, 
even internally, to a lustful imagination or de- 
sire, is a grievous sin, deserving of hell for all 
eternity. 

It is plain, then, that we cannot believe that 
all Catholics are saved ; for unfortunately it is 
not orily too probable, but even we may say 
certain, that many of them are suddenly cut off 
in sin, or die without truly repenting and pur- 
posing to amend it. 

And think of the grossness of the charge that 
your notions involve against your fellow-citi- 
zens. How would you feel if you were a priest, 
and w r ere told that you undertook to get every 
one for whom application was made out of 
purgatory (whatever that may be) for a money- 
consideration, and that (as is often said) you 
worked on the feelings of poor and ignorant 



Purgatory. 



113 



people, perhaps even preaching what you did 
not yourself believe, in order to extort money 
from them ? 

Try at least to remember that a priest is not 
a mysterious being, evolved somehow out of the 
depths of what you call the dark ages ; but that 
he is a man of at any rate a fairly decent char- 
acter in society, against whom grave charges 
of immorality in general are seldom established ; 
and see if it is quite fair to accuse him without 
any real proof of intolerable meanness, tyranny, 
and imposition such as this would be. And if 
you are not acquainted with any priests, and 
have a general idea, such as unfortunately 
those of our Anglo-Saxon race, so called, are 
rather apt to have, that foreigners are capable 
of all sorts of villany, and that priests are most- 
ly foreigners, or Irishmen at any rate, I would 
suggest to you that not a few of them are, like 
the writer of these pages, as much of what you 
would call pure American descent and family 
as you are 3^ourself, and have perhaps been as 
strong Protestants as you are now. 

Then try to give up all this nonsense, handed 
down to you from the dark ages of ignorance 
about the Catholic faith in which your fathers 
lived, and just listen to a little truth about it 
from one who has had ideas like yours, but 
now knows what he is talking about. 

Well, then, the fact is, that we believe that 



H4 



Purgatory. 



the Catholic who loves God and his neighbor is 
saved, and that the Catholic who commits a 
grievous sin, and dies without true repentance, 
is damned. But we believe that Catholics who 
are saved, and are sure therefore of heaven in 
the end, do not necessarily enter on it immedi- 
ately. For there are sins which are not griev- 
ous or mortal. Such sins we call venial. I 
hardly think yoM would seriously believe that a 
boy who stole an apple from an orchard or from 
a grocery store would be condemned to hell for 
it ; on the other hand, you do believe that a 
murderer or an adulterer dying impenitent 
would, no matter if he did have faith in Christ. 
For dying impenitent would mean that he did 
not care about the offence to God in his murder 
or adultery, and was ready to commit more if 
it suited his convenience. This distinction be- 
tween mortal and venial sins is then simply 
common sense. Of course we cannot always 
decide whether a sin is mortal or venial, but 
that there is a difference between the two is 
plain. 

Now, it is on account of these venial sins that 
we believe most of those who are saved do not 
enter heaven immediately. For though they 
are venial or comparatively easy to be forgiven 
(for that is what the word ' ' venial ' ' means) , 
still they are sins, and they defile the soul ; and 
as we have seen, nothing defiled can enter 



Purgatory. 



"5 



heaven. The soul with the taint of sin on it, 
however slight, cannot see the face of God. It 
must be purified first, and there is nothing like 
suffering patiently borne to purify a soul. 
This we cannot help seeing, even in this world. 

Now, purgatory means a state of purification 
or purging from sin by suffering; it is, then, 
entirely reasonable that the soul not as yet 
thoroughly purified in this world should be in 
purgatory for a time, till this purification is 
accomplished. 

But in order that this doctrine may be more 
thoroughly understood, I must explain to you 
the Catholic teaching about satisfaction for sin. 
I shall begin a little way back, and come gradu- 
ally to it. 

Perhaps you imagine — I think most Protes- 
tants do — that we Catholics believe that we can 
atone or satisfy for sin simply by doing some 
good works, such as almsgiving, or by punish- 
ing ourselves for it, as by fasting or abstinence 
from meat. I have, however, already told you 
that this is not the case ; that we believe, just 
as much as any Protestant does, that Christ's 
Passion and Death is the only thing that can 
satisfy for our sins. We have faith in Christ as 
our Redeemer, and our sole Redeemer, just as 
much as any Protestant has ; and what is more, 
every Catholic that has an atom of the instruc- 
tion which we endeavor to give to all, knows 



Purgatory. 



and understands this fully from his childhood. 
We do not, then, believe that we are saved by 
our own good works, but by the merits of 
Christ ; but we also believe that we caniiot avail 
ourselves of those merits of Christ unless we 
have besides faith, also what St. Paul, and the 
Church after him, call charity. 

Now, what is this charity of which St. Paul 
speaks, and of which he says most distinctly 
that it is greater than even faith itself? " Now 
there remain," he says (i Cor. xiii. 13), " faith, 
hope, charity, these three , but the greater of 
these is charity.' 9 

It evidently is not almsgiving simply and by 
itself, which is what we generally understand in 
English by charity ; for he says in this chapter 
(v. 3) : ' 1 If I should distribute all my goods to 
feed the poor . . . and have not charity, it 
profiteth me nothing.' ' 

There is no real doubt about the meaning of 
this word. The Latin word "caritas," from 
which charity comes, means simply what we 
may call for the moment dearness ; that is to 
say the virtue by which God and our neighbor 
become dear to us ; or, in other words, the love 
of God and of our neighbor, which is enjoined 
on us by Christ Himself as the sum and sub- 
stance of the whole law. We read (Iyuke x. 
27) that the young man in answer to Christ's 
question, ''What is written in the law?" 



Purgatory. 117 

answered, " Thou shalt love the L,ord thy God 
with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, 
and with all thy strength, and with all thy 
mind, and thy neighbor as thyself "; and we 
read immediately afterward that Christ told him 
he had answered right. 

Faith, then, without charity, or the love of 
God, from which the love of our neighbor 
necessarily follows — for St. John says (I. iv. 
20) : "If any man say, I love God, and hateth 
his brother, he is a liar ' ' — is, according to 
the plain teaching of St. Paul as given above, 
unprofitable, or insufficient for salvation. The 
same doctrine is taught most clearly by St^ 
James (ii. 17) : "So faith also, if it have not 
works, is dead in itself" ; or as the Protestant 
version has it, " Even so faith, if it hath not 
works, is dead, being alone." No wonder that 
Luther objected to this epistle of St. James, 
and called it an "epistle of straw"; but St. 
Paul, you see, teaches just the same thing. 
St. James, however, develops it more fully 
(ii. 14-26). 

It is, then, most certain that faith alone will 
not save us ; we must also have the love of God, 
and this love of God, unless it show itself by 
good works, is false. St. John says (I. iiL 
16-18, and I quote your own version) : <( Here- 
by perceive we the love of God, because he laid 
down his life for us ; and we ought to lay down 



n8 



Purgatory. 



our lives for the brethren. But whoso hath this 
world* s good, and seeth his brother have need, 
and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from 
him, how dwelleth the love of God in him ? My 
little children, let us not . love in word, neither 
in tongue ; but in deed and in truth.' ' 

Now, the question arises : Are these good 
works which must necessarily show themselves 
in our lives, if we have the love of God in us 
which is needed for salvation, of any use to us? 
Is the Christian who abounds in them any more 
pleasing to God than he who has only a few? 

It would seem that there can be only one 
answer to this. If our love for God pleases 
Him, and is needed that we may see His face in 
heaven, the more of it we have the more we 
shall please Him ; and each good work that we 
do under the influence of it will please Him; 
and will obtain for itself a special reward. He 
Himself teaches this most clearly : " Whoso- 
ever shall give to drink to one of these little 
ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a 
disciple, amen I say to you, he shall not lose his 
reward." 

After this, it hardly seems necessary to mul- 
tiply texts. All our good works done with 
faith and the love of God, are each and individ- 
ually to receive a reward from Him;' and it is 
perfectly well understood that our claim to this 
reward rests primarily on the merits of Christ. 



Purgatory. 



Il 9 



But now still another question comes, which is 
the real one with which we are specially con- 
cerned just now. And that is, do our good 
works, besides receiving a reward in heaven, 
and perhaps even also here, avail in any way to 
undo the effect of our sins ? Do they offer, in 
other words, any satisfaction for them ? 

Of course it is plain from what I have said 
that they cannot thus avail, according to our 
doctrine, in themselves, except so far as they 
may incline God, and indeed do certainly 
incline Him, to bring us to Christ by faith, so 
that His Precious Blood, shed on the cross, 
may wash our souls from original and actual 
sin, and implant at the same time in our hearts 
a supernatural love of Him, founded on this 
faith. Thus we read (A.cts x. 30-32) "Come' 
lius said : Four days ago, unto this hour, I 
was praying in my house, at the ninth hour, and 
behold a man stood before me in white apparel, 
and said : ' Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and 
thy alms are had in remembrance, in the sight 
of God. Send therefore to Joppa, and call 
hither Simon, who is surnamed Peter.' " And 
Peter coming, instructed Cornelius in the Chris- 
tian faith, and baptized him. 

But do our good works afterward, when we 
are united with Christ, help in any way, or join 
In with His in satisfying for our sin ? Now we 
get at the real point. 



I2G 



Purgatory. 



I would ask you to turn to St. PauPs epistle 
to the Colossians. In the first chapter (v. 24) , 
you will find, in 3-our own version, the Apostle 
saying of himself : " I, Paul, . . . who now 
rejoice in my sufferings for 3^ou, and fill up 
what is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my 
flesh for His body's sake, which is the Church. " 

Now, was not this great presumption for St. 
Paul to undertake to fill up what was behind 
(or wanting, as the more natural translation is) 
of the afflictions or sufferings of Christ ? I do 
not see how any Bible Christian can think so. 
But does not it imply that Christ's redemption 
was in some way inadequate ? No, not at all, 
according to our doctrine on the subject. 

And why not ? Because we hold that it is 
Christ's merits and sufferings only which can 
give any certain value to the works of St. Paul 
or of any one else. It is Christ's Death and 
Passion which runs through everything ; He re- 
deems us from our sins, He pays the penalty of 
them ; but He also sets the seal of His Passion 
and Death on our little efforts > made in union 
with Him, by His grace, and by souls which 
believe in Him and accept His salvation. And 
why not in the way of satisfying for sin, as well 
as in that of obtaining an increased heavenly 
reward ? 

You will say because Christ's redemption or 
satisfaction was in itself so full and complete 



Purgatory. 



I2i 



that nothing more remains to be done in that 
way. But if so, what is this that St. Paul 
speaks of that is ( ' behind ' ' or wanting in it ? 

It is just this. Christ's salvation is free, 
yes; to obtain that, we have only to accept it, 
'accompanying, of course, our acceptance with 
true repentance, and love for Him who has 
given it. But salvation is not all. If it were, 
we should, when our sins are forgiven, be free 
from even the natural consequences which they 
have entailed. But it is evident that we are 
not. The mental and bodily weakness, disease, 
or suffering which comes from sin still remains, 
as we know for a fact, unless it is removed by 
some special miracle. We are often also amen- 
able to the law of man for it ; and this law of 
man is sanctioned by the law of God. All th^t 
is absolutely promised us by salvation is that if 
we persevere in the love of God, we shall ulti 
mately see Him and be with Him in heaven for 
ever. But it does not follow that we may not 
still have to suffer for our sins on the way. 
That is clear from all human experience. 

Now, what we Catholics hold is simply this : 
that as a man may by natural means, by sub- 
jecting himself, for instance, to a painful bodily 
disciple or treatment, remove or avoid the 
natural consequences which his sins have natu- 
rally caused, so he may by supernatural means, 
that is, by the merits of Christ still lying in store 



122 



Purgatory. 



for him, avoid a remaining temporal penalty in 
the supernatural order which is still due even 
after eternal salvation has been given him. 
This salvation, due to Christ's merits, has been 
given him with but little trouble on his part ; it 
has been brought, as it were, to his door. The 
remainder is also waiting for him, but he has to 
take some trouble to get it ; to travel a little 
distance, as we may say ; to use some exertion. 
He has to fill up, not what is absolutely wanting 
in. Christ's sufferings, but what is wanting to 
him ; what he has not yet laid hold of; and this 
he has to do with some effort and some pain. 

Now, this doctrine of a remaining temporal 
penalty for sin is in complete accordance w r ith 
the idea of forgiveness ; it does not contradict it 
in any way. A father forgives his son a fault, 
but still he requires him to make some amends 
for the fault ; it is better, even for the son's own 
sake, that he should do so. 

And it is also in accordance with what the 
Bible tells us about God's own dealings. We 
read in the Old Testament of King David 
(II. Samuel xii. 13) : " Nathan said to David : 
The Lord also hath taken away thy sin ; thou 
shalt not die. Nevertheless because thou hast 
given occasion to the enemies of the I,ord to 
blaspheme, for this thing the child that is born 
to thee shall surely die." 

Again we read in the same book (chaptet 



Purgatory. 



123 



xxiv.) that David offended God by pride in 
numbering the people. He acknowledged and 
bewailed his fault, but was punished for it, by a 
plague cutting off seventy thousand of those he 
had numbered. Afterward he was told to build 
an altar to the I^ord ; and he did so, and offered 
on it holocausts and peace-offerings ; and (v. 25) 
"The plague was stayed from Israel." Here 
we have not only the temporal punishment ap- 
pointed by God for sin, but also the removal of 
it by the substitution in its place of prayers and 
good works. 

It is plain, then, is it not, that David by his 
holocausts and offerings, satisfied for his sin as 
far as this temporal penalty was concerned ? but 
surely he had no advantage that we also have 
not. He was forgiven his sin, and the temporal 
penalty was remitted, just in the same way as it 
is with us now ; both remissions were in view 
not merely of David's acts, but of Christ's 
merits. The case then with David was just the 
same as it is with us now. There is no differ- 
ence between his time and ours, except that the 
real expiation had not then been made ; but 
there was only one real expiation for sin, then 
as now; and now, as well as then, our own 
acts, poor and miserable as they are, can be, 
and are, sanctified by this one great Sacrifice 
which, in the fulness of time, God Himself 
offered for us. 



124 



Purgatory. 



This, then, is what Catholics mean by satis- 
faction. And notice, it must be made, it can 
only be made, by a soul which has been for- 
given, and which now loves God; notice also 
that it has no efficacy whatever except so far as 
it rests on the sacrifice of Christ. 

Now, almost all Christians who have attained 
adult years, even if thoroughly repentant for 
sin, and in the love of God, probably owe a 
considerable temporal penalty for their past sins* 
They will have to suffer something for them 
before they can see God's Face in heaven. 
Something they could do to avert this — they 
could substitute something for it, just as David 
did; but do they? Not very much, as a rule, 
beyond bearing with patience the sufferings of 
this life which God ' may send them. These 
sufferings, and their patience, no doubt count 
for a good deal ; but it would appear that those 
who have sinned a good deal do not have more 
suffering, probably less on the whole than those 
who have led good and holy lives. So it would 
seem that satisfaction in their case is mostly 
postponed till after death. 

So purgatory is not only a state, as explained 
in the beginning, of punishment for venial sin, 
that is, for those lesser sins which do not make 
us lose the love of God ; but also it is in purga- 
tory that the temporal penalty due to mortal or 
grievous sin, even when it is repented of, is 



Purgatory. 



125 



paid, unless satisfaction has been made for it in 
this life. 

And we believe that most Christians who die 
in the love of God go to purgatory for a time, 
for few repent or expiate their venial sins or 
their mortal ones as they should, in this life ; 
but we do not believe that any one, however 
firmly he may hold the Catholic faith, goes to 
purgatory if he dies unrepentant of mortal sin* 
No, such an one is lost for ever ; there is no 
purgatory for him. 

But of course we do not know, individually, 
who goes there and who does not. Those who 
seem the holiest and fit for heaven at once, may 
still in the sight of God need further purifying 
and further satisfaction ; and those who seem to 
die unrepentant may really turn to God at the 
last. So we prssume all Catholics who die to 
be in purgatory; though it may often seem 
more probable for a particular soul that it is in 
heaven or in hell. 

Now, is there anything that we believe can be 
done fcr them, if they are in purgatory ? Cer- 
tainly, if we admit that there is a purgatory, 
there seems to be no reason why w r e may not 
pray for the souls there in general, or for any 
particular soul which may be there ; for we may 
always pray for anything which may be pleas- 
ing to God, and we know that the deliverance 
of a soul from purgatory is pleasing to God, fot 



126 



Purgatory. 



It is a thing which He certainly intends to ac- 
complish. And charity also must induce us to 
pray, especially for those souls most near and 
dear to us. 

Furthermore, St. Paul tells us (Col. v. 24, as 
quoted) that he fills up 1 ' what is behind of the 
sufferings of Christ . . . for His body's 
sake, which is the Church.' 9 St. Paul, then, 
suffered for the Church; for his brethren in 
Christ, as well as on account of any sins of his 
own. We hold then, in accordance with his 
teaching, that we may also do something in this 
way ; offering up our own sufferings, either un- 
avoidable or voluntary, for our suffering 
brethren. 

Also David offered, as we have seen, sacri- 
fices for his sins to satisfy for their temporal 
punishment; and his sacrifices were accepted. 
Now, if David's sacrifices, which were but the 
shadow or presage of the true sacrifice of 
Christ, were accepted, have we not something 
more acceptable now ; namely, the offering of 
that one true Sacr fice, in the form of bread and 
wine, under which the true I^amb of God once 
slain is truly present, though concealed? 
Even if one does not grant what we believe 
about the Mass, certainly it is not inferior to 
David's holocausts. Why then, following 
David and St. Paul, should we not offer Mass 
for the souls of the dead? 



Purgatory. 127 

This, then, is what priests do ; but they do 
not extort money from the faithful for this pur- 
pose. If any one wishes a Mass for their 
deceased friends, it is no more than right that 
they should contribute according to theit mean<j 
to the priest's support; for, as a priest simply, 
he has no other means of support. The usual 
offering in this country is one dollar ; certainly 
a priest cannot become very wealthy on that, as 
he can say Mass but once a day. But priests 
are very careful not to force people to pay 
money, or to insist on it except where it is due 
for expenses which have to be incurred for the 
people's sake, such as those for churches or 
schools. Priests are not millionaires ; they 
simply cannot provide these things, where the 
Church is not supported by the state, unless 
the people pay for them. 

Now, I think we have pretty well gone over 
this doctrine of purgatory, and of the Catholic 
practice with regard to it. But you may proba- 
bly ask what evidence we have that there is 
any purgatory; why do we make it a part of our 
faith? 

To this I would answer that we make it a 
matter of faith because, if it is clear with re- 
gard to any doctrine that it always has been 
believed in the Church, it is with regard to this. 
Faith expresses itself in practice ; and we find 
the practice of praying for the dead reaching 



128 



Purgatory. 



not only into the early ages of Christianity, but 
even into those of the Old Testament. As a 
matter of history, at least, this is made clear 
from the second book of the Machabees, in 
which we read of Judas Machabeus that, 
"making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand 
drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to 
be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking 
well and religiously concerning the resurrec- 
tion. (For if he had not hoped that they that 
were slain should rise again, it would have 
seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the 
dead;) and because he considered that they 
who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great 
grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy 
and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, 
that they may be loosed from sins." 

I say as a matter of history, at least; for 
though Protestants do not regard the books of 
the Machabees as inspired, they cannot deny 
that these books were read reverently by the 
Jews, and no protest made against this doctrine 
by those who believed in the resurrection. It 
may be added that the Jews at the present day 
pray for the dead, as their fathers did before them. 

And we do not find that any protest was 
made against prayers for the dead till the 
peculiar Protestant doctrine of justification by 
faith alone was introduced at the time of the 
Reformation. This doctrine, of course, shuts 



Purgatory. 



129 



out the idea of such prayers, for it requires no 
real purity of soul as a condition for entrance 
into heaven ; it only requires that its unclean- 
ness should be covered by the mantle of Christ's 
righteousness accepted by faith ; and hence, of 
course, according to it, there is no difference in 
fitness for heaven between the soul of the most 
perfect follower of Christ and that of a life-long 
sinner, if only both have accepted Him as their 
Saviour. 

But we have quite an explicit teaching or ex- 
planation of the doctrine of purgatory in the 
writings of St. Paul in the New Testament. 
It is very hard to conceive any other meaning 
for the passage. It is found in the first epistle 
of the Apostle to the Corinthians, iii. 11-15; 
and is as follows : * ' For other foundation no 
man can lay, but that which is laid ; which 
is Christ Jesus. Now, if any man build 
upon this foundation gold, silver, precious 
stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man's work 
shall be manifest ; for the day of the Lord 
shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in 
fire ; and the fire shall try every man's work, 
of what sort it is. If any man's work abide, 
which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive 
a reward. If any man's work burn, he shall 
suffer loss ; but he himself shall be saved, yet 
so as by fire." 

This passage seems to plainly teach that the 



Purgatory. 



works of Christians differ in their acceptable- 
ness with God ; that their good works, done to 
please God, shall not be touched by this fire, 
but their works which are more or less spoiled 
by sin must be purified if not altogether con- 
sumed by it, the soul of the sinner nevertheless 
being saved. What is this fire which burns 
some works of Christians, but not others, the 
soul still being saved, if not that of purgatory? 

But do not for a moment imagine that the 
Church teaches, or that any Catholic imagines, 
that unrepented mortal sin can be burnt out in 
this way. By no means ; as has been said, 
there is no salvation for any one dying with 
such sin on his head. 

As to the suffering in purgatory, the Church 
has never defined precisely what it is ; and it is 
probable that in this life we cannot fully under- 
stand it. The soul in purgatory is separated 
from the body by death, and not yet reunited 
with it by the resurrection, so that bodily pains, 
as we understand them, seem impossible. 
Nevertheless, all suffering really is in the soul ; 
and it is possible that the disembodied soul 
may suffer pains similar to that which in this 
life come to it through the body. But the prin- 
cipal suffering would seem to be that which 
comes from the temporary separation of the soul 
from God, whom it desires and longs to be 
united with most ardently. 



Purgatory. l^t 



Instinctively, I think, almost every one 
recognizes or wishes to recognize the truth of 
the Catholic faith in this respect. Of course 
when one dear to us dies in the faith of Christ 
after a saintly, or even an ordinarily good life, 
there is not much difficulty in representing 
them to ourselves as being now in heaven ; but 
when the life of such an one has been quite 
worldly and imperfect, we all feel that he is 
hardly fit for heaven, and yet we cannot bring 
ourselves really to believe that his portion is 
with the lost. We feel that God will yet be 
merciful to him, and admit him to the heaven 
for which he has hoped, and to which, though 
weakly and imperfectly, and with many falls by 
the way, he has endeavored to direct his steps. 
And we want, if we love such an one, to do 
something to help him, and to hasten the hour 
of his arrival at that eternal home. And even 
though we may have been taught that prayers 
for the dead are useless, they will rise unbidden 
to our lips. It is human nature's tribute to the 
Catholic teaching, which is also that of the 
Greek Church, and of all the churches of the 
East as well ; and is not only consoling to our 
feelings and hopes, but also in accordance with 
reason and common sense. 



CHAPTER XII. 



THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD ; EVEREST* 
ING LIFE. 

I HAVE said that purgatory, as understood 
and believed by Catholics, is a temporary 
state ; with regard to its duration in any par- 
ticular case, of course we can know nothing, 
unless by some special revelation. Jlowever, it 
is evident that it cannot extend after what is 
commonly known as the day of judgment. 

With regard to this day of judgment it is a 
matter of faith that there will be such a day, in 
which all mankind will be judged together, and 
the place or state of every human being de- 
finitely assigned for all eternity. No doctrine 
is more plainly taught in Holy Scripture than 
this. 

We have in the book of Daniel (xii. 2) the 
following words: "And many of those that 
sleep in the dust of the earth, shall awake: 
some unto life everlasting, and others unto re- 
proach, to see it alwa}^." 

From this, as it stands in English, ve should 
plainly gather that only some of the dead were 
to arise to judgment ; and it is a good instance of 

the impossibility of arriving at certain con- 

132 



The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 133 



elusions of faith by simply taking the translated 
Bible as we have it in our vernacular, and the 
futility of attempting to do so. Taking this as 
we should naturally understand it, it is in con- 
tradiction to the words of our Lord himself 
(John v. 28-29): i( Wonder not at this, for the 
hour cometh, wherein all that are in the graves 
shall hear the voice of the Son of God. And 
they that have done good things, shall come 
forth unto the resurrection of life ; but they that 
have done evil, unto the resurrection of judg- 
ment.' ' For you notice that Daniel says, 
" many of those,' ' whereas Christ says " all." 

It is plain that unless Daniel is to contradict 
our Lord Himself, we must understand by the 
words "many" in his text, that the number 
will be great ; and we must look at the idiom 
of the language in which his words were ori- 
ginally written. Hence the need of some in- 
terpreters of the Bible must, it seems to me, be 
quite clear, unless every Christian is expect- 
ed to be a learned man and a profound stu- 
dent. 

We also 'find in St. Matthew's gospel (xxv. 
31-46) a very explicit and full description of 
the day of judgment, given by Christ Himself: 
" And when the Son of Man shall come in His 
Majesty, and all the angels with Him, then 
shall He sit upon the seat of His Majesty ; and 
all nations shall be gathered together before 



134 The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 



Him, and He shall separate them one from ano- 
ther, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from 
the goats" (verses 31, 32). 

St. Peter is very full also in his description of 
the day of judgment ; telling us distinctly that 
the world shall at that time be destroyed by 
fire. He says (I. Pet. iii. 10): "The day of 
the Lord shall come as a thief, in which the 
heavens shall pass away with great violence, 
and the elements shall be melted with heat, and 
the earth and the works which are in it shall be 
burnt up." 

Science, I need hardly say, cannot contradict 
this prophecy ; for no one who believes in God 
can deny His power to dispose of what He has 
made, by special exertions of His power ; but 
it may be added that such a destruction of the 
earth may easily come from causes now in 
operation. To produce such an effect, a col- 
lision of some large external body with the 
earth of the sun, or even a serious derangement 
of the orbit of the earth by the influence of such 
a body, would be amply sufficient. 

The doctrine of the general judgment is 
taught clearly in other parts of Scripture, but it 
is hardly necessary to dwell longer on the mat- 
ter. It is generally accepted by Christians who 
believe in revelation, and is embodied in what 
is called the Apostles' Creed, which Christians 
generally recite. ' 1 From thence ' 1 (that is, from 



The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. a 3 5 



heaven) "he shall come to judge the living 
and the dead," are the words of this creed. 

We are told, as has been seen, that at the 
general judgment our bodies shall rise from the 
graves in which they have been laid. But how 
about those which have not been buried ; those 
which have been cremated, torn and devoured 
by wild beasts or cannibals? 

To this it may be answered that it is not nec- 
essary that all the particles actually composing 
a human body at the time of death should be 
reassembled in the body which shall rise at the 
last day. This would require a special and 
miraculous Divine interposition in some cases, 
as in that of a cannibal dying shortly after he 
had thoroughly assimilated some portions of 
another human body with his own ; to avoid 
the difficulty, it would be necessary that his 
life should be specially preserved against the 
attacks of his enemies until these portions had 
departed from his body, or that they should be 
prevented from assimilation, or removed in 
some miraculous way. 

Also in the case of a good and holy person 
dying, as may well be the case, with a body' 
wasted or corrupted by some loathsome and 
disfiguring disease ; it surely would not be that 
spoiled body with which that person would rise, 
and could hardly be a new one made from the 
identical particles of which that was composed* 



136 The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 



And indeed the Church teaches that the 
glorified bodies of the saints shall not have 
disfiguring and inglorious marks like these, 
and that limbs or members which they have 
lost shall be restored in heaven ; for our Lord 
can hardly have meant in saying, as we find 
His words recorded in Mark ix. 42, that we 
should actually enter "into life, maimed,' 9 or 
(v. 44), 4 'lame, into life everlasting/ * but 
rather that we should lose our hands and feet in 
this life rather than forfeit the life to come ; for 
perfect happiness would be inconsistent with 
these blemishes and inconveniences. Compare 
also Matt. v. 29, 30, where the same lesson is 
taught in different words. These defects must 
then be made up from material not belonging to 
the body at the time of death ; and there seems 
to be no reason at all why this material should 
at any time of life have belonged to that body, 
and been separated from it in the constant 
changes which our bodies undergo in this life. 

The fact is that a precise restoration of all the 
particles belonging to a body is not necessary to 
constitute identity. When the change goes on 
gradually we call a body the same though all 
its particles may be replaced in course of time 
by others, as in the case of our bodies during 
life. And a considerable change may even be 
suddenly made without affecting identity. No 
one would dream that our bodies lost identity 



The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 137 



by having a tooth pulled, or a new piece of, skin 
grafted on in place of what had been destroyed. 

We must conclude, then, simply that at the 
resurrection the body will be what we should 
call the same as that which we have now, but 
not that every individual particle or chemical 
atom of the elements of which it is composed, 
no more and no less, shall be used in its recon- 
struction. 

From what has been said and the texts which 
have been quoted, it is plain that there will be 
two distinct classes of those who rise at the last 
day. Some rise, as Daniel tells us, to life ever- 
lasting, the others to reproach ; or as our Lord 
tells us more distinctly, they that have done 
good, to the resurrection of life ; they that have 
done evil, to that of judgment ; that is, for the 
former sin and death are blotted out and 
destroyed for ever; whereas in the latter sin 
remains, to be judged according to its deserts, 
the merits of the death of Christ not having 
been applied to atone for it. 

It is not, however, that Christ did not shed 
His blood for all ; the Church teaches that He 
did. But some have refused to avail themselves 
of His sacrifice, by not repenting and turning 
from sin, and believing and trusting in their 
Saviour, so far as He has been made known to 
them. 

It is impossible for us to decide what on the 



138 The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 



whole will be the resurrection or future state of 
those who have had no opportunity of knowing 
anything about Christ and the redemption 
which He has offered. But we do know that 
salvation was possible before this redemption 
was actually accomplished, or the way of it dis- 
tinctly made known ; and it seems certainly 
impossible that the state of a man could be 
changed by the actual accomplishment of the 
great sacrifice of the Cross, if the conditions 
under which he was living were such that he 
could not possibly hear of it, or that in fact he 
.had not the slightest information with regard to 
it. Therefore it seems certain that by means 
of the death of Christ all men in all ages have 
had, and that all now living have, the means 
of salvation, if they make the best use of the 
light and the grace from God which is given to 
them. And indeed St. Thomas Aquinas, than 
whom there is no higher human authority in 
the Church, tells us that God would send an 
angel specially to instruct one who could not 
obtain what instruction was necessary in any 
other way. 

So we need not inquire further into this 
matter ; it is our duty to bring the light of the 
gospel to those who do not have it, to instruct 
them in the Christian faith, and persuade them 
to embrace it ; especially as without the strength 
which it gives it is extremely hard even to keep 



The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 139 

the law which is manifest to all, as St. Paul 
says (Rom. i. 19-20). But we should not pass 
absolute judgment on any one, and especially 
not on those to whom the gospel has not been 
preached. St. Paul says (I. Cor. v. 12, 13) : 
"What have I to do to judge them that are 
without ? . . . For them that are without, 
God will judge.' 1 

Those, then, who by faith of some kind, 
and by a life corresponding to it, have pleased 
God, shall be saved. But let it not be im- 
agined that a man can, therefore, simply rest 
content with the knowLedge that he has, or 
that with which others are seemingly satisfied. 
It is the duty of every one to know God's will 
and God's truth according to the means offered 
to him; not to rest till he has attained what 
knowledge is attainable by him on this, the 
most important of all matters. And having 
attained it, he must regulate his life according 
to it ; not transgressing the known law, or im- 
pugning the known truth ; or if he have done 
so, repenting with his whole heart. One mortal 
sin, one grievous departure from what con- 
science dictates, takes away the life of the soul 
in God, and brings upon it eternal condemna- 
tion. And carelessness or indifference as to 
what God wills us to believe or to do has mani- 
festly the same effect. 

L,et it not, then, be imagined that we can 



140 The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 



adopt the shallow and deceitful maxim, that it 
makes no difference what a man believes, as 
long as his life is right. ^ For how can a man's 
life be right if he sins against God by disbelief 
in what He teaches or reveals, or indifference 
as to whether He does actually teach or 
reveal a particular truth, whether that truth 
concern faith or morals? This maxim simply 
takes for granted that every one naturally and 
without effort knows everything about his 
duty; that every one, no matter what his 
education or surroundings, knows what it has 
puzzled the greatest human intellects, un- 
assisted by revelation, to discover. 

But to resume our proper siTyect. Those 
who are saved or lost are, according to the faith 
of the Church, saved or lost both body and 
soul at the general resurrection. To the for- 
mer are given bodies not only perfect and in- 
corruptible, but also endowed with other pro- 
perties not naturally belonging to material 
substances; the faculty of passing over great 
distances with ease and quickness, and of pass- 
ing unobstructed through material obstacles ; 
as was the case with the risen body of Christ, 
which, as we read (John xx. 19), presented 
itself to his disciples though the doors were 
shut. Also the bodies of the saved shall be 
insensible to pain, and of course not liable to 
disease . or weariness \ and shall be perpetually 



The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 141 



young and strong, and receive nothing but 
comfort and enjoyment from any circumstances 
in which they may be placed. 

As to those of the lost, the direct opposite is 
held. The results and consequences of sin re- 
main in them ; they are incorruptible and In- 
destructible, but otherwise they have no super- 
natural qualities. They are sensible to pain, 
and undoubtedly suffer it ; just what this pain 
is, has never been precisely defined ; the com- 
mon opinion has always been that it was to a 
great extent actual fire, as our Lord Himself 
uses this word in describing it. 

Now another question remains to be con- 
sidered. What is the state of the souls of the 
lost, from the time of death, and of that of the 
saved from the time of their deliverance from 
purgatory — if that purification has been nec- 
essary for them — to the tipie of the resurrection? 

The teaching of the Church on this point is 
that heaven begins for the saved, and hell for 
the lost, before the resurrection ; though in a 
limited and incomplete sense ; and yet in the 
most important respect, for the principal happi- 
ness of heaven is in the union of the soul with 
God, and in its enjoyment of Him by what is 
called the beatific vision, whereas the principal 
misery of hell is in the eternal separation of 
the soul from God, which is then most keenly 
felt, the vanity and insufficiency of thq false 



142 The Resurrection ; Everlasting Life. 

pleasures sought during life being then plainly- 
seen. And as it is, after all, in the soul that 
all real pain or happiness is felt, there is no 
reason why there should not be in heaven be- 
fore the resurrection something equivalent to 
bodily enjoyment, or in hell, as in purgatory, 
to bodily pain. 

The soul, then, is believed to pass to what is 
called the particular judgment (that is, the 
judgment for each one in particular) , immedi- 
ately after death ; and its eternal state is then de- 
termined, according as it has left this world in 
union with, or separation from God. Most of 
those on whom a favorable sentence is pro- 
nounced, we have reason to believe, remain a 
while in purgatory before they are fit to enter on 
the joys of heaven ; and they themselves, recog- 
nizing their unfitness, would desire nothing else. 
The rest go immediately to their permanent 
state, only to be changed at the last day by the 
resurrection and resumption of the body, which 
shares in the punishment of sin, as it has shared 
in the sin itself. 



CHAPTER XIII. 



THK PRIMACY OF THE ROMAN PONTIFF. 

THE next article of the profession of faith 
which we are discussing concerns "the 
primacy, not only of honor, but also of juris- 
diction, of the Roman Pontiff/ ' It is hardly 
necessary to say that by the Roman Pontiff is 
meant the Pope. That we regard him as the 
successor of St. Peter, and St. Peter as the 
Prince or head of the apostles, has already been 
stated. By his being the Vicar of Jesus Christ 
we mean that he is the representative of Christ 
as the head of the Church, and under Christ, 
its visible head and ruler. ^ 

Now, what is meant by the primacy, not only 
of honor \ but also of jurisdiction , of the Pope? 

Primacy means the first or most distinguished 
place. By a primacy of honor would be meant 
the being entitled above others to certain out- 
ward signs of respect, the having what is called 
the precedence over others in public assemblies, 
processions, and the like. Thus in England, 
for example, the Prince of Wales has a primacy 
of honor, next after the Queen ; after her, the 
greatest outward respect would be shown to 
him. But he has, as long as he remains merely 

143 



144 The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 



Prince of Wales, no jurisdiction whatever in 
the kingdom. He does not sit in Parliament, 
and has no voice in the making of the laws; 
and his approval of them is not required. 

By jurisdiction is meant just this, the power 
of making laws, or in some way governing 
others legally. So in this respect, you see, a 
member of the House of Commons in England 
has jurisdiction, which the Prince of Wales has 
not. The primacy of jurisdiction would belong 
to him who had the greatest power of law- 
making or of government. 

When we say, then, that in the Catholic 
Church the Pope has not only the primacy 
of honor, but also of jurisdiction, we mean that 
not only is the Pope entitled to the greatest out- 
ward marks of respect, that to him, for ex- 
ample, would belong by right the first place of 
honor in all assemblies or councils of bishops 
and prelates, but also that he has a higher gov- 
erning power in the Church than any of them. 

In fact the Catholic doctrine is that the Pope 
has supreme jurisdiction in the Church; that 
there is no jurisdiction or government in it 
which is not liable to control by him. He has 
the power of making laws for the whole 
Church, or of repealing laws which have been 
made ; being however, of course, limited in 
this, like other legislators, by the condition that 
his laws must be useful, just, and reasonable, 



The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 145 



and not in conflict with the divine law. In 
case of doubt on any of those points, however, 
the presumption, as with other legislators, is in 
his favor. 

Bishops have, however, a similar law-making 
power in their own dioceses, and their laws do 
not require the Pope's approval that they may 
go into effect ; but the Pope has the right and 
the power to modify or change the laws of 
bishops, and to oversee and control their action 
as he may deem expedient. As a rule, how- 
ever, he does not exercise this power or inter- 
fere with their legislation. 

It would be beyond the scope of a work like 
the present one to bring up the proofs that the 
Pope is really entitled to this supreme jurisdic- 
tion. Whole books have been written on the 
subject, and can be consulted by any one so 
inclined. The principal texts of Holy Scrip- 
ture on which this doctrine is based have been 
given in the chapter on the infallibility of the 
Pope ; I would merely remark here that there 
seems to be no reason why our Lord, after twice 
saying, "feed my lambs,' ' should say the third 
time, "feed my sheep/ ' unless the word 
* ' sheep 1 9 meant something different from the 
word " lambs.' ' The sheep are understood by 
Catholics to be the prelates of the Church, the 
lambs the laity. 

But the principal argument in its favor is to 



146 The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 



be derived from the actual history of the 
Church, and from the impossibility of such an 
enormous usurpation of power as this would be, 
without the force of arms to carry it out. 

The supreme power of the Pope is also in ac- 
cordance with the requirements of common 
sense. For the Church, to maintain its posi- 
tion in the world, and to discharge effectively 
the office committed to it by Christ, must neces- 
sarily have some general government ; and that 
government cannot well be by means of a con- 
gress or parliament, on account of the difficulty 
of calling such a body together in an institu- 
tion which is world-wide ; the monarchical form 
seems then necessary for it ; and the dangers of 
the extraordinary powers residing in its head 
are well compensated, to say nothing of the 
special divine supervision by Christ the in- 
visible head of the Church, by the weakness 
of its visible head the Pope, as far as the arms 
of this w r orld are concerned. 

But now r an important point must be con- 
sidered ; and it is this. The sphere of the 
Papal government is spiritual, not temporal. 
The Pope, as such, has no right to command in 
matters which simply concern the temporal well- 
being of men in general, or even of Catholics 
in particular ; in other words, he has no power 
to make laws on those subjects with w r hich the 
State is legitimately concerned. On the con- 



The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 147 



trary, his whole influence, and that of the 
Church in general, is rightfully used, and as a 
matter of fact has always been used, to incul- 
cate obedience to existing governments, even 
though their strict right to govern might be 
questioned. It has always maintained the doc- 
trine taught by St. Paul (Rom. xiii. 1-2) : 
"I,et every soul be subject to higher powers; 
for there is no power but from God : and those 
that are, are ordained of God. Therefore he 
that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance 
of God. And they that resist, purchase to 
themselves damnation." 

It is perfectly clear to any one who will read 
history that disobedience to the laws of the 
State has been always regarded by the Church 
as sinful, as long as the State keeps within its 
legitimate province. But if the State arrogates 
to itself powers which belong to the direct gov- 
ernment of God over the individual soul, or to 
the province of the Church itself as the guide 
of its members in spiritual affairs, such an 
usurpation the Church cannot sanction. The 
State cannot lawfully command us to blaspheme 
the name of God, or to commit adultery; 
neither can it command us to deny the Chris- 
tian faith, as the emperors of heathen Rome 
and other persecutors have endeavored to do. 
Nor can the State make laws directing the con- 
sciences of Catholics in the matter of a divide 



148 The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 



institution like marriage, which has a spiritual 
as well as a temporal aspect, except so far as 
the merely temporal part, such as the inheri- 
tance of property, is concerned. 

This was the basis, for example, of the resist- 
ance of Catholics to the attempts of the English 
sovereigns, specially of Henry VIII., Elizabeth, 
and James I., to enforce the oath of allegiance 
to the sovereign as head of the Church as well 
as of the State. This Catholics knew to be an 
intrusion, an usurpation of power; and they 
suffered heavy penalties, and often a most horri- 
ble form of death, rather than submit to it. I 
shall have more to say of this matter of persecu- 
tion later on. For the present it may merely be 
remarked that what may be called persecution 
on the part of the State, of openly expressed 
opinions and of practices which are contrary to 
its well-being in the temporal order, are obvi- 
ously sometimes necessary, as in the cases of 
anarchists and polygamists ; though the victims 
may complain that their consciences are tram- 
pled on, and if they really believe that their 
consciences speak to them in the name of God, 
may be properly called martyrs to what appears 
to them to be the truth. 

The relations of the Pope and of the Catholic 
Church to the State, or in other words, to the 
political government of the country, are a matter 
most important to understand, and one which 



The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 149 



has always occupied a foremost place in the 
minds of Englishmen and Americans. It is not 
too much to say that the real reason of the suc- 
cess of the Reformation in England was not so 
much any attachment to its doctrines on the 
part of Englishmen, as a fear and jealousy of 
Papal interference in the government of the 
country. And it is the same here. We hear 
continually that the Catholics care more for the 
Pope than for America, that the priests manage 
and control their vote in the interests of the 
Church, and other stuff of this kind, which 
would be simply amusing to us from the ab- 
surdity of many forms in which the idea is ex- 
pressed, did we not know that, strange and 
ludicrous as it seems to us, it is considered 
quite a serious matter by our fellow-country- 
men. If they only knew a little, or would make 
themselves a little acquainted with the way 
things really work, they would see that priests 
do not and cannot direct the Catholic people 
politically, except where some moral question is 
involved in which the voice of the Catholic 
Church may be quite clear, as, for example, the 
matter of temperance, or of the laws of mar- 
riage ; and they would notice if they would 
follow the priest in his daily life in his house 
and in the church, that politics played much 
less of a part in it than in that of the Protestant 
minister, especially in these latter days; that 



1 50 The Primacy of the Roman Pontiff. 



he does not preach about politics, talk about it 
on the streets or in the homes of his people, or 
bring it up in the confessional. To do so 
would simply weaken his influence on the 
people for good, and they would in fact be 
scandalized at a priest's devoting much time 
even to talking about it, and still more if he 
should be a political worker. Of course there 
are such cases, and the Catholic people do not 
admire them. 

And if Protestants would inquire a little, they 
would also find that priests who do take interest 
in politics are on both sides, both Democrat and 
Republican ; that they sometimes get into quite 
animated discussion among themselves about 
political matters ; and that the same is the case 
with the Catholic people. The priests may 
have political opinions, of course, like any 
other American citizens, but they cannot force 
them on the people for the very simple reason 
that they disagree with each other, and cannot 
speak in the name of the Church about these 
matters because the Church does not tell them 
what to say. 

But in connection with this general subject 
there is one special point deserving of a more 
extended discussion ; one w r hich has excited a 
good deal of interest, and never more than at 
present, in the minds of Americans ; and that is 
the position the Catholic Church takes with 



Catholic Education. 



15* 



regard to education, which seems to many 
Protestants unpatriotic (if they do not call it by 
some worse name) and full of danger for the 
future of the country. As this matter comes 
right in our line at present, I will devote a 
chapter to it, though it has no very direct rela- 
tion to the substance of the profession of faith 
which we are occupied in considering. 



CHAPTER XIV. 

CATHOUC EDUCATION. 

S we enter on this subject, I shall first 



XjL endeavor to dislodge from your minds a 
strange idea which seems to have settled quite 
firmly in those of many American Protestants ; 
that is, that the main point Catholics are 
anxious about in educational matters is the 
driving of the Bible out of the schools. Our 
Protestant friends start with the assumption 
that we detest the Bible, and do not want our 
people to read it or even hear of it. They 
believe that Martin IyUther dragged it from 
the obscurity to which it had been consigned 
for centuries, and that one of the principal 
efforts of the Church has been ever since then 
to get it back, at least as far as Catholics are 
concerned, into that obscurity. 




152 



Catholic Education. 



In fact, the effort of the Church has always 
been the other way ; that is, to induce her 
children to read the Bible. It was, of course, 
rather difficult to do much at this before the 
invention of printing ; Bibles, though com- 
moner than other books, were rare enough, 
necessarily. But when printing was invented 
Bibles were immediately printed, and Catholics 
were encouraged to read them. It is strange 
how hard it is to get solid, hard, historical 
facts into the heads of those whose previous 
ideas do not fit in with them, and how the most 
absurd legends are accepted in their place. As 
to the facts, I quote from Dr. Maitland's Dark 
Ages the following, which may be more con- 
vincing, as the author w r as a distinguished 
Protestant clergyman, librarian to the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, and a Fellow of the 
Royal Society. He says: "To say nothing 
of parts of the Bible, or of books whose place is 
uncertain, we know of at least twenty different 
editions of the whole Latin Bible printed in 
Germany only before L,uther was born." 
Again, Seckendorf, the biographer and admirer 
of I^uther, confesses in his Commentaries on 
Lutheranism that three ^distinct editions of 
the Bible translated into German were pub- 
lished at Wittenberg in 1470, 1483, and 1490. 
Now Luther was born in 1483. In all, about 
seventy editions of the Bible, translated into the 



Catholic Education. 



153 



vernacular tongues of Europe, were published 
before L,uther had got out one copy of his Ger- 
man Bible. 

The Bible that IyUther found, and which it is 
supposed was such a great discovery, was a 
Latin one ; it will be seen from what has just 
been said what nonsense it is to suppose that he 
found it by a rare chance, and rescued it from 
obscurity. And yet he had the audacity to say, 
in his Table Talk, that he was twenty years 
old before he saw the Scriptures. This, no 
doubt, may impose and has imposed on many ; 
but to those in possession of the facts it must 
be evident either that he was singularly ignor- 
ant or indifferent in his early life about the 
Holy Scriptures, or that when he made the 
above statement he was simply telling a lie. 

I said above that the desire and effort of the 
Church is, and always has been* that Catholics 
should read the Bible. But she desires that 
they should read it reverently, not twisting it 
to support their own fancies, but understand- 
ing its more difficult passages as they have 
been understood by learned and enlightened 
Christian commentators. Catholics, however, 
have never been so anxious to read it as the 
Church has been that they should do so ; and 
indeed the reason is not far to seek. For they 
know that no passage of the Bible is contrary 
to their faith, or can teach them anything 



I$4 Catholic Education. 



absolutely new or startling in trie matter of re- 
ligion, when it is rightly understood; so it 
becomes to them a book of what we call 
spiritual reading, very excellent no doubt, but 
in most of its parts differing principally from 
other spiritual books (of which we have, by 
the way, probably a hundred to every one pos- 
sessed by Protestants) in its being absolutely 
authoritative and inspired, whereas the others 
are only practically sure to be free from error. 
In other spiritual books the truths of the Bible 
are presented more fully and in a more modern 
and familiar style, so that we can hardly won- 
der that they are, as a rule, preferred ; and that 
though good Catholic families generally have a 
Bible, it is more venerated than read. But 
none have any principle against reading the 
Bible ; and all know that their pastors would 
like them to read it. 

But why then, you will ask, did they, and 
the priests too, object to reading the Bible in 
the schools ? This is not a difficult question to 
answer. One reason was that the Bible used 
was the Protestant Bible, to which we have 
objections on account of its not being an author- 
ized, or in all respects a correct translation, and 
also on account of its leaving out a number of 
books which w r e consider as the word of O-od. 
Also we object to the Bible, a book confessedly 
bard in many places to understand, being r^-id 



r. - - . . . 

Catholic Education. 155 

out to children and young people by persons 
often having no real acquaintance with or rev- 
erence for its sacred text ; and experience shows 
that the reading of the Bible in this way tends 
to destroy respect for it, and often leads even to 
jokes being made upon its words. Lastly, we 
should always object to having Catholic chil- 
dren forced to obtain instruction from Protest- 
ant sources, and to join in prayer under Prot- 
estant guidance. We do not force our religion 
on others, we do not want others to force theirs 
on us. It strikes us that this is nothing but 
the liberty to which Americans are entitled. 

Another objection that Catholics have to the 
reading of the Bible in the schools is that it 
is liable to be accompanied by the recitation 
of the Protestant form of the Lord's prayer, in 
which the words " for thine is the kingdom, the 
power, and the glory, forever and ever," which 
we do not recognize as belonging to the sacred 
text, and which are generally considered by 
critics to be an addition made by copyists, are 
found. The omission of the "Hail Mary," a 
prayer, as has been seen, dating from very early 
times, is also liable to give scandal to our chil- 
dren. The long and short of it is that we pre- 
fer to say our own prayers, and to say them in 
our own way. 

But this whole matter of prayers or Bible* 
reading is in fact, as has been already stated., 



x 5 6 



Catholic Education. 



a comparatively unimportant issue. The real 
point is that we do not consider the religious 
instruction given in this way as at all adequate, 
though it is, of course, better than nothing, ex- 
cept for the inconveniences already mentioned. 

We regard religion as the most important 
part of a child's education. 

We are very far from despising the ordinary 
branches of knowledge taught in the public 
schools ; though, in common with many others, 
we consider a great deal of the instruction there 
imparted to be quite useless, simply a stuffing 
of the heads and straining of the memory of the 
young with matters of no use except for those 
who are to pursue some special line of intellec- 
tual work in later life. But we consider 
instruction in the principal points of faith as 
more necessary than even the most elementary 
teaching of arithmetic ; since it is much more 
of an advantage to know the way of salvation 
than to be able to add up a column of figures. 
We do not wonder that our Protestant or infidel 
fellow- citizens do not look at the matter just as 
we do ; for as they look round on the world in 
general, it necessarily seems to them that 
creeds are simply opinions held on a subject 
on which certainty is quite unattainable, and 
that every one will have to form his own opin- 
ion after his school-days are over. But it is 
different with us. The truths of faith are with 



Catholic Education. 



157 



us a matter of certain knowledge, not of opin- 
ion; they are verities revealed distinctly by 
Almighty God, and coming down to us, by the 
wonderful means which He has instituted, un- 
changed and immovable through these eighteen 
centuries. They are more certain as well as 
more important than anything else we can 
know, for it is God Himself who tells them 
to us. 

We insist, then, that they be not sacrificed to 
matters of far less value. We do not want to 
have our children, tired out with mental appli- 
cation during the week, restricted to an hour at 
most on Sunday for learning these supremel} r 
important branches of knowledge. And we 
desire this not only as Christians, but as pa- 
triots ; for we know that the teachings of the 
Catholic religion are the best that can possibly 
be given to make good citizens. A Catholic 
who believes what his religion teaches cannot 
be a socialist, an anarchist, or a free-lover. 
Indeed, all the real dangers now threatening 
the social fabric come, as we know very clearly, 
and as others would also know if they would 
only try to find out what we really do teach, 
from the neglect of Catholic doctrine. 

It is, then, no more than reasonable, since we 
cannot expect that these truths, salutary as 
they are, should be taught in the public 
schools, that we should use all lawful means 



158 Catholic Education. 



to secure them at least for our ,own people. 
We do not want to force them on any one else, 
but we do not want to lose what we have, and 
what our children ought to have after us. And 
also it is reasonable that we should protest 
earnestly against all compulsory schemes of 
education which would prevent us from teach- 
ing adequately these most important matters to 
those who, by the faith they have, will firmly 
believe and act upon them. And it is also per- 
fectly reasonable that we should endeavor to 
have the public school system so arranged that 
parents, whether Catholic or not, may, where it 
is practicable, provide for the religious instruc- 
tion of their children in the same schools in 
which their secular training is given. In other 
countries of mixed religions this is done without 
detriment to good schooling and without making 
the State responsible for anything more than the 
secular studies. 

Now, I say that we are willing that the State 
should teach the children the common branches 
of knowledge which all should have, such as 
reading, writing, arithmetic, geography, history, 
and the more elementary portions of mathema- 
tics and of physical science. But there is, no 
doubt, a difficulty here. 

It is with regard to history especially. We 
are not willing that distinctively Protestant edu- 
cation on this matter should be given to our 
children. We are not willing, for instance, 



Catholic Education. 



159 



that they should be taught that L,uther began 
his Reformation because the^ Church was selling 
people permission to commit sin. We do not 
blame you for teaching that to your children, 
if you really believe it ; but we know that it is 
false. We know that an indulgence is not a 
permission to commit sin ; that every Catholic 
would be horrified at the idea of a permission 
to commit sin being given under any circum- 
stances, and much more that it should be sold. 
We cannot tolerate instruction being given to 
our children which falsely represents the 
Church as a monster of iniquity. And so 
with regard to other matters which Protestants 
hardly notice, and which, perhaps, slip in here 
and there in connection with almost any sub- 
ject, so much have they been accustomed to 
take false statements against the Church for 
granted, and even to consider them as self- 
evident truths. As, for example, the common 
representation in geographies of countries as 
being * 1 enlightened ' 9 simply because they are 
Protestant, while Catholic ones are barely rec- 
ognized as " civilized,' ' if even that courtesy is 
allowed them. We want our children to learn 
facts, not opinions. We do not want to fling 
mud at Protestants, or represent them as hold- 
ing doctrines which they themselves disclaim ; 
and if any such statements can be found in our 
books, we are ready to expunge them in< 



i6o 



Catholic Education. 



stantly. But if they will not do the same for 
us, we must have our own books ; that is all 
there is about it. And we have no desire to 
represent Protestants or infidels as grovelling in 
ignorance or laziness ; we give them full credit 
for what they have done and are doing in the 
natural order, and simply insist that they shall 
give us credit for wdiat we have also done ; if 
they will not do us justice, we must do it our- 
selves. 

We are ready to do everything that we can, 
without sacrificing our most vital interests, for 
the convenience of all ; we do not want separate 
schools for our children if we can in any other 
way, without unjust burden on ourselves, get 
the religious instruction for them which they 
need. We do not want to build up any walls 
between our children and others unnecessarily ; 
we want them to be true patriotic Americans, 
heart and soul devoted to the interests of the 
glorious nation to which they belong. But we 
cannot sacrifice the spiritual for the temporal, 
the interests of eternity for those of this world. 

Try, then, to get rid of these bugbears which 
have been haunting the English mind for cen- 
turies about our wanting to subject this coun- 
try to the Pope ; these visions of armies of 
Jesuits, in or out of disguise, who want to con- 
trol the politics of the nation for the temporal 
aggrandizement of the Church. We would 



Catholic Education. 161 



like to convert you all to the Catholic faith, 
that is true ; but we want to do so by reason 
and truth, not by force or trickery. And we 
desire your conversion for your own sake, not 
for any advantage it is going to bring to us. 
The Pope does not want any temporal power or 
kingdom, except so much as is needed to make 
him independent of the nations, so that he can 
freely exercise his spiritual office, without fear 
of interference or undue influence from any of 
them. He would not take the Presidency, or 
even the permanent sovereignty, of this or any 
other country, except that of which he has been 
unjustly deprived. He has got quite enough 
to attend to as it is. 

What he wants, and what we all want, is 
simply to have in fact what all Americans have 
in theory ; that is, freedom to worship God 
according to the dictates of our own conscience, 
as long as by so doing we do not injure the 
liberty or the rights of others. That is the 
whole matter in a nutshell, though your preju- 
dices may make it hard for you to believe it. 



CHAPTER XV. 



THE VENERATION OF THE SAINTS, AND OP 
THEIR IMAGES. 

THIS is the next article of our profession. 
And it is a point on which, more than any 
other, the Protestant mind in general entertains 
false notions of our creed, and consequently 
objects most vehemently to it. 

It is even said that in order to indulge our 
idolatrous practices we have gone so far as to 
suppress the second commandment of the 
Decalogue, by which the worship of idols is 
most clearly forbidden. 

It is really a wonderful thing that intelligent 
people should suppose that we wanted to do 
such a thing as this, or that we could succeed 
in doing it even if we wanted to. It would be 
a great deal more reasonable to say that we 
had a special edition of our own of the Consti- 
tution of the United States, which Catholic 
lawyers and statesmen held to be the correct 
one. Even if you will believe us to be liars 
and deceivers, this is too palpable a fraud. 

But in fact, if you will take the trouble to 
look into a Catholic Bible, a book to be found 
in every Catholic book-store, you will find, in 

162 



The Veneration of the Saints. 163 



the same place of course as in your own (ExocL 
xx. 4), the words : " Thou shalt not make to 
thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any- 
thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth 
beneath, nor of those things that are in the 
waters under the earth. Thou shalt not adore 
them, nor serve them." 

And you will find the same thing in our 
catechisms, large and small. 

It is, however, true that in some of the 
smaller ones, intended only for little children, 
this commandment is omitted. But this is 
simply because it is long and hard to remem- 
ber, and because it would be difficult for the 
very young to understand what it means. Be- 
fore they get through their Sunday-school they 
have it all in full ; it is not kept back or con- 
cealed from any Catholic. 

But in fact, even when it is omitted, the 
omission can hardly do harm. For really the 
prohibition of the worship of idols which it 
contains is implicitly contained in the words 
which go before, and which are always given 
in all our books, " thou shalt not have strange 
gods before me," or as it stands in the Protes- 
tant version, " thou shalt have no other gods 
before me." And the real truth of the matter 
is, that Protestants have made a mistake in 
making two commandments out of what is 
really one. 



164 The Veneration of the Saints. 

The gist of this one commandment is the 
worship of the one true God to the exclusion of 
all others. And when we have the words 
" thou shalt not have strange gods before me " 
we have idolatry completely shut out. If we 
cannot worship any god but the One, it is plain 
that we cannot take images for gods, and wor- 
ship them. These words then, out of which 
Protestants make their second commandment, 
are really only a principal application of what 
goes before. 

To compensate for the error made in dividing 
the first commandment into two, Protestants 
have been obliged to run two into one some- 
where else in order to get the number ten, as it 
should be. They have, therefore, taken the 
two prohibitions at the end about coveting the 
neighbor's wife and his goods (which are dis- 
tinct exactly in the same way as those about 
adultery and stealing, being the desires cor- 
responding to these acts) and made one out of 
them. And because we look at the matter in 
a different and really more reasonable light, 
they jump at the conclusion that we want to 
get idolatry in by suppressing the prohibition 
of it. They take one little catechism, and that 
is enough to settle the matter. But I hope you 
see by this time that we have and teach all 
this about the making of graven images just 
the same as you do. 



The Veneration of the Saints. 165 

But now perhaps you say : " Even if this is 
so, it does not help your case, though it does 
make a point against us. For if the worship 
of images is condemned in what you admit to 
be the word of God, you are all the worse in 
practically sanctioning and allowing it." 

Still, I think any one keeping up the attack 
on these lines would begin to lose courage a 
little. For he would see that when you look 
at the matter closely, it is getting to be a little 
hard to show that we are sinning against this 
law of God. 

For surely this law cannot mean that w r e are 
not to make images of any kind. If so, there 
has been a fearful disregard of it in almost all 
Christian countries. If that is the sense of it, 
the sculptor's business is wrong all the way 
through, and ought to be mosc severely pro* 
hibited by law. Those statues of great men 
ought to be removed from our streets and 
public squares ; you ought to smash the little 
statuettes you probably have in the house and 
throw the pieces in the ash-barrel ; you ought 
not, if you value your soul, to buy a Noah's 
ark for your children ; for the man who got this 
up broke this commandment in the most 
wholesale way. 

Oh, no ! you will say, " we are not so foolish 
as to think that we may never make images of 
anything at all. What everybody understands 



1 66 The Veneration of the Saints. 



by this law of God is, that we must not worship 
images. And that is just what you Catholics 
are doing all the time. Why, you cannot go 
into a Catholic church but you see some wo- 
man, or perhaps even a man, who ought to 
have more sense, kneeling down before one of 
these images you have, and praying to it as if 
it were God. If that is not idolatry, I don't 
know w r hat is." 

No doubt it seems to you now that you have 
a good certain charge against us. I,et us see. 
After all, one should not judge entirely by ap- 
pearances. If there is any doubt, every one is 
entitled to the benefit of it before having to 
bear the grave charge of idolatry. According 
to the principles of law, one should be con- 
sidered innocent until his guilt is proved. 

The only real fact the charge is based on is, 
that the woman is praying, and that while 
praying she is kneeling before a statue. Now, 
I suppose that when you pray yourself you are 
kneeling ; that is the posture which is generally 
considered proper for prayer, though some ad- 
vanced Christians pray, or at any rate join in 
the minister's prayers, without leaving their 
seats, perhaps bending the head a little, or put' 
ting their hands or hats before their faces. 
Still, I hardly think even these would claim 
that kneeling was an inappropriate position, 01 
showed too much respect* 




The Veneration of the Saints. 167 



Well, then, if one is kneeling, he must kneel 
before something, and probably look at some- 
thing, unless it is of obligation to put one's 
head down on a chair or a bed (which, I am 
sorry to say, even Catholics are too apt to do) , 
or to close one's eyes. The difficulty, you see, 
about either of these methods is that one is 
quite apt to go to sleep. So it is better to keep 
one's eyes open and the head straight up, 
though this does require some effort. 

If, then, one does this, is it best to look at a 
blank wall, or at some other object ? It seems 
naturally best to look at something which in 
some way suggests pious thoughts and keeps 
the mind from wandering. If the mind has no 
picture presented to it, it will make one of its 
own, probably. So if we are praying to our 
lyord Jesus Christ, which the immense majority 
of Christians, believing in His Divinity, con- 
sider it perfectly lawful to do, is there any 
harm in having a representation of Him before 
our eyes ; a picture of Him such as even Prot- 
estants often have, as He appeared at some 
time during His life here, or as we may imagine 
Him to appear now in heaven ? Will not this 
help to fix our thoughts on Him ? Really, it is 
not very easy to see why Protestants should not 
help themselves in this way to pray well and 
fervently. And even if one is praying, as we 
generally do, to the Eternal Father Himself, 



i68 The Veneration of the Saints. 



why not have before our eyes a representation 
of His well-beloved Son, and especially of His 
Sacrifice on the Cross, through which our 
prayers become efficacious with God ? Why 
there should be any objection to praying before 
a crucifix is really a puzzle ; still more is it a 
puzzle why Christians should object to having 
a crucifix in their house, when they would 
willingly have a picture or a statue of George 
Washington or Abraham Lincoln. 

Well, now let us go a step farther. Suppose 
you had some dear friend whom you confidently 
believed to be now in heaven ; one whose 
whole life had been to you an example of piety 
and virtue ; one, the very thought of whom 
would bring you nearer to God and make you 
feel the value of prayer, and induce you to pray 
as this one did ; would it not help you in your 
^prayer to have the picture of such an one be- 
fore your eyes ? 

" Oh, well ! 99 you say, " this is all very fine ; 
but everybody knows that Catholics are not 
using their pictures and statues, or even their 
crucifixes, in this way. They are making real 
idols of them; attaching, that is, a superstitious 
value to them ; believing that these images and 
pictures have a real power in themselves ; in 
short, making gods of them. 5 } 

The true and the short answer to this is, that 
nobody knows anything of the kind; for no- 



The Veneration of the Saints. 169 



body can know something which is entirely 
false. No Catholic, however ignorant, has any 
such idea as this, as you would find out if you 
would ask any one whom you found praying in 
this way. It might not be safe always to ask 
such a question, for it would be regarded as an 
insult, and might naturally provoke a sharp 
reply, if not something more, unless the person 
questioned happened to be a saint. The feeling 
it ought to excite would be pity for the igno- 
rance of the questioner ; but people are not al- 
ways reasonable, and might be apt to look at 
the matter in a different way. 

It is true, however, that the person asked, if 
patient enough to explain the matter to you, 
would quite probably give an account of what 
he or she was doing somewhat different from 
that which I have thus far given. It might be 
admitted that the prayers now being made were 
addressed not immediately to God, but to the 
saint whose picture or statue was there. 

But if so, what then ? Suppose that the dear 
friend of whom I have spoken were to appear 
visibly before you from heaven, would you 
simply converse with him on ordinary matters ? 
Would it not occur to you that if he prayed a 
good deal on earth, there was no reason why 
this habit of prayer should have been dropped, 
especially as now he did not need to pray for 
himself? Would you not then ask that he 



170 The Veneration of the Saints. 



would pray for you, that you might also save 
your soul, as he had done ? Do you seriously 
believe that if }^our clergyman, your father, or 
your mother, can pray for you in this world, 
that they cannot do so if they are admitted to 
the presence of God in heaven ? 

" Oh ! 99 you say, " of course I suppose they 
could, and probably I would ask them to do so. 
But you see it is not the person in heaven that 
appears to you, but only a picture or a statue, 
and that of somebody you never knew in this 
world, and who probably does not know or care 
any more about you than the picture or statue 
itself does." 

Here I acknowledge that you have at last 
made a reasonable point. And I do not under- 
take to prove to you that when we pray before a 
picture or a statue of a saint, that that saint in- 
fallibly hears or knows what we are saying, or 
even what we are doing. But I do say that 
it is not impossible or absurd that they may. 
Let us listen to some words of our Lord that 
have some bearing on this point. He says 
(Matt. xxv. 20): " And he that had received 
the five talents, coming, brought other five 
talents, saying : Lord, thou didst deliver to me 
five talents, behold I have gained other five 
over and above. His lord said to him : Well 
done, good and faithful servant, because thou 
hast been faithful over a few things, I will place 



The Veneration of the Saints. 171 



thee over many things : enter thou into the joy 
of thy lord." And in St. Luke xix. 17 we 
find a similar passage : i i Well done, thou good 
servant, because thou hast been faithful in a 
little, thou shalt have power over ten cities. * ' 
These passages show clearly what indeed we 
should naturally expect ; namely, that the ser- 
vants of God who have pleased Him in this 
world shall in the next have their opportu- 
nities and consequently their powers for good, 
very much extended ; that they shall be able 
without effort to attend to much more than they 
could possibly have attended to here. And it 
is not for us to place the limit to this extension 
of their powers, as long as it remains finite ; 
while it is that, it is infinitely inferior to the 
power of God itself. And we should also bear 
in mind the immense extension in late years of 
even our natural powers by natural means, 
such as the telegraph particularly ; for if so 
much can be done naturally, how much more 
supernaturally ? And if great men here on 
earth have been able to attend, simultaneously, 
as it would seem, to many times as much busi- 
ness as the ordinary man could manage, why 
cannot the saints in heaven even far surpass 
them ? 

Another consideration must now be added. 
We must remember that the saints in heaven 
see God face to face ; as St. Paul says (I, Cor. 



1 72 The Veneration of the Saints, 



xiii. 12): " We see now through a glass in a 
dark manner : but then face to face. Now I 
know in part ; but then shall I know even as I 
am known." They can then, without the in- 
terposition of other means, know directly what 
God knows, so far as it pleases-Him to reveal it 
to them. 

And besides all that has been said, we must 
all acknowledge that even if the saint does not 
know of each pra}^er that we make, asking his 
or her intercession, at any rate God knows it ; 
and He is pleased with the honor shown to one 
who has been His friend in life, and is many 
times more His friend now ; for He knows that 
this honor is not intended to shut out the honor 
due to Himself any more than the good opinion 
which w T e have of a holy man on earth does. 
Why, then, should He not grant Himself the 
favor which He knows that we are asking, 
even more readily when these friends of His are 
invoked, since He knows that it is not ac- 
companied by any distrust of His own goodness 
and mercy? 

But there is one thing more to fall back on. 
You say that kneeling is too much honor to pay 
to any one but God Himself. 

Now, this idea is one which perhaps would 
hardly occur to any one but an American, or a 
citizen at any rate of some republic, where 
one shakes hands with the chief magistrate* 



The Veneration of the Saints. 173 



and calls him plain "Mr." ; the subjects of 
monarchies, even of constitutional ones, are ac- 
customed to a good deal of ceremony in the 
presence of princes, even going so far as genu- 
flexions. But we Americans do not like these 
obeisances, and feel that we can have all due 
respect for authority interiorly without showing 
it in this way. 

Probably we are in a great measure right ; at 
any rate there is no doubt that these ceremonies 
of earthly courts may proceed merely from 
human pride, and in any case that the interior 
is vastly more important than the exterior. 
God Himself infinitely prefers a contrite and 
humble heart to any amount of exterior posing. 
But still the interior naturally suggests the ex- 
terior; if one really feels interiorly abased, it 
is likely that he will feel like taking a humble 
position of body, and will do so unless some 
principle restrains him ; unless he thinks or 
believes that it would be wrong for him to do so. 

The question then is, Is it really wrong to 
kneel before any one but God? If it is not, 
surely we can be allowed to do so, if we like. 
We are not forced to do so, unless by refusing 
we disturb the peace and quiet of an assembly, 
as would be the case if a person should insist 
on standing up in a Catholic church because 
the prayers happening to be said at the time 
were addressed to the Blessed Virgin or some 



174 The Veneration of the Saints. 



saint. If any one objects to kneeling in church, 
he has an easy remedy ; he can either quietly 
leave the church, or he can at least remain seated. 

Well, then, to come to the point, if it is wrong 
to kneel before any one but God, we ought, if 
any account can be found in the Bible of any 
one kneeling before a holy man or an angel, to 
find that he was told not to do so. But in fact 
it is just the other way. 

We find in the first chapter of the second 
book of Kings (we call it the fourth book) an 
account of several messengers being sent by 
the king to Elijah (or Elias, as we call him, and 
as your Bible also does in the New Testa- 
ment) . The first two did not treat the prophet 
with much respect, but ordered him, in the 
name of the king, to come down from the hill 
where he was. The result was that they, with 
the men they had brought with them, were con- 
sumed by fire from heaven. 

The third learned wisdom from the fate of 
the others, and coming to Elias, "fell on his 
knees" before him (v. 13) and begged him to 
spare his life. Was Elias angry now at this 

idolatry' ' on the messenger's part, and pun- 
ched him (or rather, did God punish him ? for of 
course Elias had in himself no such power) for 
his showing too great reverence, as he had the 
others for showing too little ? By no means. 
On the contrary we find (v. 15) that "the 



The Veneration of the Saints. 



175 



Angel of the Lord spoke to Elias, saying, Go 
down with him; fear not.'' 

We also find (II. Kings iv. 27 and 37) that 
the Sunamite woman offered similar homage to 
Elisha, falling at his feet, and that the prophet 
would not have her corrected or disturbed for 
so doing. 

Let us look now at the tenth chapter of the 
book of Daniel. We find there that Daniel, 
as he was standing by the bank of the Tigris, 
suddenly saw a magnificent and terrible angel ; 
and that at the sight of him he fell on the 
ground in a faint. The Angel roused him from 
this, and set him on his knees and hands, and 
spoke a few words to him ; he did not rebuke 
him for this, as it were, slavish position, but 
actually placed him in it. As, however, he 
wished to inspire him with confidence, and to 
remove his terror, that he might listen atten- 
tively and intelligently to the words which were 
to be said, he then told him to stand ; and 
Daniel stood trembling, evidently much prefer- 
ring to remain in his more humble position. 
There is not the least hint that Daniel believed 
that he was seeing God Himself ; the vision was 
in fact that of an angel, or as the prophet says, 
it seemed to him of a man (v. 5) ; still he was 
afraid to stand upright before one whom he 
recognized as a representative of God. And 
certainly Daniel, a man most specially divinely 



176 The Veneration of the Saints. 



enlightened even among the prophets, would 
have known if it was wrong to kneel, and 
would have got on his feet of his own accord. 

Now, let us look at the instance given in the 
Revelation (or Apocalypse, as we call it) of St. 
John. It is true that there the angel at whose 
feet St. John fell (xix. 10) corrected him for 
the adoration he was about to give, and said, 
" See thou do it not; I am thy fellow-servant, 
and of thy brethren who have the testimony of 
Jesus. Adore God." But this was plainly 
because St. John thought that Jesus Himself 
was standing before him, and wished to pay 
him divine honor interiorly, as well as the 
exterior obeisance. It may be observed also 
that we are not told that the angel ordered St. 
John to change his bodily position, which he 
had already assumed. 

These instances, together with one which I 
am about to mention to illustrate what I shall 
shortly say, are all that occur to me in the 
Bible as proving anything on this matter, one 
way or the other. And for our side, one 
instance is sufficient. If it is essentially 
wrong to kneel before an angel or a man, it 
cannot be right under any circumstances ; 
whereas it may be right in itself, but wrongly 
intended in some cases, and therefore reproved 
in those cases. 

But the fact is that the worship given by 



The Veneration of the Saints. 177 



Catholics to angels and saints, and expressed 
by kneeling or other outward signs, though 
not, as seems clear from the above texts, essen- 
tially wrong to be paid to them simply as ex- 
alted beings, specially honored and beloved by 
God, is really to a great extent a worship of 
God Himself; of His divine majesty and per- 
fection as shown in them. It is because they 
represent God that we specially honor them, as 
one honors a king or a nation in the ambassador 
as representing that king or nation. To bring 
this out clearly, let us again turn to the Bible 
(Gen. xviii.) We shall there find that the 
Lord appeared to Abraham as he was sitting 
at the door of his tent. The vision was in 
the form of three men ; this has been generally 
supposed to represent the Holy Trinity. Abra- 
ham went to meet them, and " adored down 
to the ground," as our version has it. Yours 
says, " bowed himself toward the ground.' ' 
But, at any rate, it is clear that he was paying 
God honor in their persons, whatever position 
he assumed ; for he said, " My Lord, if I have 
found favor in thy sight, pass not away from 
4;hy servant." It is also, however, plain that 
he did not regard them as being simply God, 
but as representing Him, for he offered to wash 
their feet, and asked them to eat bread, and 
to rest under the tree ; just what he would 
have said to any honored human guests. 



178 The Veneration of the Saints. 

It is, then, in some respects, a worship to 
God that we pay when we honor His saints, in 
whatever way we may do it. And it is not on 
account of their excellence in themselves that 
we honor them, but on account of their nearness 
to Him, and their showing forth of His divine 
perfections. 

And experience shows that, so far from our 
hearts being estranged from God by our honor- 
ing the saints and praying to them, it is, as a 
rule, those Catholics who are most devout to 
the Blessed Virgin and the saints who also 
love God the most, and give the surest test 
of that love by being willing to make and 
actually making the greatest sacrifices for Him. 

I have said a good deal about the matter of 
exterior reverence, because our actions in this 
way are so much misunderstood. But it is 
clear, if we think of it reasonably, that of itself 
the matter is not an essential one. If it were 
essentially necessary to be always kneeling 
when speaking to God, not only would most 
Protestants be much at fault, but the prayers 
of all of us would be much restricted. There 
is nothing in the exterior actions of worship 
which is strictly necessary, or which has any 
absolute significance ; all really depends on the 
interior spirit and intention, which expresses 
itself in different, but not necessarily or even 
possibly, in adequate exterior forms 



The Veneration of the Saints. 179 

Now, in connection with this matter of the 
veneration of the saints, I want also to speak 
of another closely related to it ; and that is, the 
value which we place on relics. 

Really this is nothing peculiar to Catholics. 
We have only to visit any museum to see the 
attraction which there is for people in general 
in the relics of great or celebrated men, and 
even of those who have been noted for bad 
lives. The coat or writing-desk of Washington 
or Napoleon is looked at with great interest, 
and many would be glad to pay a high price for 
such an article ; and so they would, quite likely, 
for a piece of the rope with which some notori- 
ous criminal was hung. It is true that there 
are some who do not care about such things ; 
but I think they are the exception, an^ Dy no 
means the rule. 

The feeling cannot, perhaps, be logically rea- 
soned out and accounted for, but it is there all 
the same. It is really hard to conceive how a 
Christian could possibly be indifferent to, or 
uninterested in the seamless garment of our 
Lord, or the crown of thorns which was placed 
on His head at the time of His Passion ; or that 
he would not wish very much to have a portion 
of either of these for his own. If he would 
highly value a lock of his mother's hair, or any 
other souvenir of one who had been so dear to 
Vim ? is it possible that he would be indifferent 



180 The Veneration of the Saints. 



to a memento of One whom lie professes to love 
more than father and mother. " He that loyeth 
father or mother more than me, is not worthy 
of me," says our L,ord Himself (Matt. x. 37) ; 
how, then, can a Christian be indifferent to the 
relics of his Saviour? 

And if we love Him, we love also in a special 
way His friends, those who are nearest and 
dearest to Him; His Mother, His foster-father 
St. Joseph, His Precursor St. John Baptist, His 
beloved disciple St. John the Apostle, and the 
other Apostles to whom He said, ' ' 1 will not 
now call you servants : for the servant knoweth 
not what his lord doth. But I have called you 
friends ' ' ; also the holy martyrs who laid down 
their lives for Him, and the saints who, more 
perfectly and completely than Christians in gen- 
eral, took up their cross and followed Him. So 
in a similar way we prize and treasure memen- 
toes of them, as we would His own. 

The only difference, then, which one would 
expect to find in this matter of mementoes and 
relics, as also in that of pictures and statues, 
between the Christian and the heathen would 
be in the persons in whom interest was thus 
shown. And this is the difference we do find. 
The world has pictures and statues of its great 
ones; of great rulers, military leaders, states- 
men, poets, inventors in the arts and sciences, 
and it values their relics ; the Christian has his 



The Veneration of the Saints. 181 



pictures, statues, and relics of those who have 
been distinguished in the matter which he must 
needs regard as of paramount importance — that 
is, the love of God. 

But you will say, " It is all well enough for 
Catholics to care about relics of the saints" 
(and why not for Protestants, too ?) , " but what 
we object to is that they attach a superstitious 
veneration to them. They think that the pos- 
session of a relic will insure their salvation.' ' 

I do not deny that there is a possibility of su- 
perstition in this matter; but there is always 
a danger of any religious conviction running 
into superstition, and the only way to certainly 
guard against this is to extinguish the religious 
feeling too, and indeed to deny the supernatural 
altogether; but one cannot take this latter 
course and remain a Christian at all, unless one 
can be considered as a Christian who simply re- 
gards Christ as a great and good man. But the 
Catholic Church always labors to prevent and 
discourage this tendency to superstition, not to 
increase and encourage it. 

The occasion for it lies in something that we 
cannot get rid of, unless we are to g< : rid of the 
Bible itself. For the Bible tells us that God 
has been pleased to work miracles and confer 
great blessings by the means of relics. We 
find (II. Kings xiii. 21) that when a dead body 
was put into the sepulchre of Elisha, "and 



1 82 The Veneration of the Saints. 

touched the bones of Elisha, the man came to 
life, and stood upon his feet." 

We find also (Matt. ix. 20-22) that a certain 
woman came behind our Lord "and touched 
the hem of his garment ; for she said within her- 
self, If I shall touch only his garment, I shall 
be healed." And she was healed. Our L,ord 
did not call her act superstition, but faith ; He 
said to her, <c Be of good heart, daughter, thy 
faith hath made thee whole." 

Again (Acts v. 15), we find that the people 
brought the sick into the streets, and placed 
them so that Peter's shadow at least might fall 
on them ; and it would appear from the next 
verse that even these were cured. And (Acts 
xix. 12) that "there were brought from his 
body" (that of Paul) "to the sick handker- 
chiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed from 
them, and the wicked spirits went out of them." 

May I ask, why, if such things happened 
then, they should not also happen now ? That 
they do happen, we have the most ample evi- 
dence. But more about this later. 

Of course, the Catholic Church understands, 
and teaches her children, that miraculous favors 
given by means of relics, or in any other way, 
are primarily for the glory of God and of His 
saints, and do not come as a matter of course, 
or infallibly, by the use of certain external 
means ; and also that they must, as a rule, be 



The Veneration of the Saints. 183 



accompanied or even preceded by good and 
holy dispositions on the part of those who re- 
ceive them. But human frailty or wickedness 
does not always attend to this salutary teach- 
ing, and abuses these supernatural gifts, losing 
the benefit of them, as it does also with the 
natural gifts and blessings of God ; but that is 
not the fault of God, nor is it that of the 
Church, which labors to remove and prevent 
these dangerous and scandalous errors. 

But now you have another objection. You 
say that there is a vast amount of fraud about 
this business of relics ; for example, that there 
are more relics of the true Cross than would 
make a great many crosses of that size ; and 
that this fraud is endorsed by the Church. 

I will ask you to take the example cited, and 
make a simple calculation on it. I think you 
will allow that the cross was probably equal in 
bulk to a beam of wood 200 inches long, 6 wide, 
and 4 thick, which makes 4,800 cubic inches. 
Now, an average relic of the true cross would 
not exceed a piece i-ioth of an inch each 
way; indeed, this would really much exceed 
the average. But even at this, you see we 
would have 4,800,000 such relics, or one to 
every fifty Catholics. But one to every thou- 
sand would come nearer to the proportion of 
those who actually have them. Indeed, this 
would be a considerable over-estimate. 



184 The Veneration of the Saints. 



Again you will say, " But they have the head 
of such a saint preserved in several different 
places. Here is certainly an unblushing and 
obvious fraud.' ' 

You make this objection because you do not 
understand our way of speaking about these 
matters. Catholics understand well enough 
that by the head is meant a portion, perhaps 
a notable portion, of the head. This is en- 
closed in a reliquary representing a head, and 
you imagine that the whole head is supposed to 
be there ; but no one except yourself who sees 
it thinks of any such thing. 

That there should be, however, some mis- 
takes about relics is obviously unavoidable, 
and the unscrupulous, no doubt, will attempt 
frauds, and sometimes succeed. But the 
Church has always taken great care, and 
takes more and more every }^ear, to prevent 
this ; and does not give certificates of genuine- 
ness, or " authentics," as we call them, to any 
relics without careful examination by competent 
and learned officials. 

I think you will see that there is nothing un- 
reasonable about this devotion; but if any 
Catholic does not take interest in it, he cer- 
tainly is not obliged to. Nor is any one re- 
quired to pray habitually to the saints, as long 
as he does not object to it on principle ; and to 
fail to ever do so would seem to imply such an 



The Remainder of the Profession. 185 



objection, as, for instance, if one should refuse 
to say a ' ' Hail Mary 99 now and then ; for thi£ 
prayer has the highest possible sanction, both 
directly by the Church and by Catholic feeling 
and practice ; and to ignore it could hardly 
mean anything but heresy on the part of the 
person so acting. 



CHAPTER XVI. 

THE REMAINDER OF THE PROFESSION, 

THE remainder of the profession is princi- 
pally occupied with matters which have 
already been discussed. I have already treated 
at some length of the great and decisive au- 
thority which we attach to the Scriptures, or 
the Bible, and the way in which we believe that 
this Word of God should be read and under- 
stood. 

By the "Apostolic and Ecclesiastical Tradi- 
tions 9 9 is understood the traditions which have 
come down to us, by word of mouth or by un- 
inspired writings, with regard to the faith of the 
Church. That these are of value, and are rec- 
ognized as being so in the Bible itself (II. Thess. 
ii. 14), where we read: "Therefore, brethren, 
stand fast ; and hold the traditions which you 
have learned, whether by word, or by our 



1 86 The Remainder of the Profession. 



epistle. " Also (II. Tim. ii. 2) we find : "And 
the things which thou hast heard of me by 
many witnesses, the same commend to faithful 
men, who shall be fit to teach others also." 

It is perfectly in accordance with reason, 
common sense, and the necessities of the case, 
to say nothing of the actual facts of history, 
that the teaching of the faith in the first few 
centuries should have been mainly oral, and 
that tradition should have been, as it actually 
was, the main guide of the faithful, especially 
during the ages of persecution. In later times 
we do not depend on it so much, as the Scrip- 
tures are so easily accessible, and the decisions 
of the Church so abundant. 

The profession now proceeds to include gen- 
erally the other matters of faith resting on the 
decrees of the Church, specially those made in 
the General Councils. Of these twenty-one 
are recognized, as follows ; the places and dates 
are given : 



1. — Nicaea or Nice I., s 


: A.D. 


325 


2. — Constantinople I., 


( < 

i 


381 


3. — Ephesus, 


ii 


431 


4. — Chalcedon, 


ti 


45i 


5. — Constantinople II., 


f< 




553 


6. — Constantinople III., 




680-8 s 


7. — Nice II., 




787 


8. — Constantinople IV., 




869-70 



The Remainder of the Profession. 18^ 



9. 


— Rome (Lateran) I., 


. A.D. 1123 


10. 


— Rome (L,ateran) II., 


" ii39 


II. 


— Rome (L,ateran) III., 


" ii79 


12. 


— Rome (Iyateran) IV., 


" 1215 


13. 


— Lyons I., 


" 1245 


14. 


— Lyons II., • 


" I2 74 


15. 


— Vienne, . 


" 1311 


16. 


— Constance, 


• " 1417-18 


*7- 


— Basle, 


" I43T 


18. 


— Florence, 


" 1439-45 


19. 


— Rome (Lateran) V., 


" 1512-17 


20. 


—Trent, . 


" 1545-63 


21, 


— Rome (Vatican), , 


" 1869-70 



These councils were composed of bishops 
gathered from all parts of the Catholic world. 
All Catholic bishops are invited to such as- 
semblies, and have a vote on the matters dis- 
cussed. The last two are specially mentioned 
in the profession as treating of matters more 
controverted now by Christians in general. 
The Council of Trent was called on account 
of the Protestant Reformation; it defined the 
dogmas of faith which were impugned by the 
Protestants, and effected various reforms in the 
matter of Church discipline ; there were corrup- 
tions and evil practices which had crept in, 
and really needed reformation ; and this true 
reformation of the Church was thus legitimately 
and quite thoroughly effected. 



1 88 The Remainder of the Profession^ 

The Council of the Vatican was opened by 
Pius IX. on December 8, 1869; it was ad- 
journed in the following year on account of the 
troubles of the times, which culminated in the 
seizure of Rome on September 20 of that year 
by the troops of Victor Emanuel, King of Italy. 
In this council various matters concerning the 
primitive truths of religion were defined against 
modern infidelity, and the infallibility of the 
Pope, as it has been explained above, was 
solemnly declared. 

In assenting to and accepting the decrees of 
these councils, and therefore, also, specially on 
account of the decision just mentioned, the de- 
crees of the Pope himself when he solemnly and 
formally teaches the faith to the Christian 
world, we simply make a logical and reasonable 
act. It is not necessary, in order to accept and 
believe what God teaches us by the means 
which He has established, that we should know 
precisely what it is that He teaches. We be- 
lieve it beforehand, just in the same way, but 
with a far higher degree of certainty, as a jury 
believes in the testimony of a witness of un- 
impeachable character, before he opens his lips 
to give it. 

It is, however, the desire of the Church that 
we and all the world should know just what 
our faith teaches us on every point. Our Di- 
vine Lord committed His doctrine to His dis 



The Remainder of the Profession. 



189 



ciples secretly, but He instructed them to pro- 
claim it publicly. " That which I tell you in 
the dark, speak ye in the light,' ' said He; 
* ' and that which you hear in the ear, preach 
ye upon the house-tops.' ' 

This the apostles did ; and though for a time 
it became absolutely necessary, on account of 
persecution, to observe some secrecy (for 
Christ Himself had said, " Give not that which 
is holy to dogs ; neither cast ye your pearls be- 
fore swine, lest perhaps they trample them under 
their feet, and turning upon you, they tear 
you"), such is not the case now. There is 
nothing which we need or wish to keep back of 
what we believe, either with regard to Catholic 
faith or practice ; and in what follows I propose 
to explain some points which have not been 
spoken of in this profession. . 

Before proceeding to these, however, I wish 
to remark on some words which may give a 
false impression in the concluding sentence, in 
which it is said, " I detest and abjure every 
°rror, heresy, and sect." By this is meant not 
tnat we detest any person who does not em- 
brace our faith, or detest any sect in the sense 
that we hate the persons belonging to it ; but 
that we detest heresy — that is, we hate the false- 
hood which is contrary to the truth, and also 
the spirit of denial of what one knows to be the 
truth, for that is heresy, properly so-called; 



190 The Remainder of the Profession. 



and that we detest the separation of what 
Christ said should be 1 ' one fold and one shep- 
herd " (John x. 16), into various bodies out of 
harmony with each other and with separate in- 
stitutions and governments, as being a thing in 
itself wrong and displeasing to God ; but not 
that we hate the individuals who have been un- 
fortunately in this way alienated from the visi- 
ble communion of Christ's Church. 

I shall also now treat of the opening words or 
preamble of the profession which you remember 
I passed by at the natural place. Some part of 
what has been said in the course of our ex- 
planation seems to be properly required to un- 
derstand this preamble fully ; or at least we are 
now better prepared to understand it than we 
should have been then. It propounds a doc- 
trine which gives difficulty to many ; that is, 
that ' ' no one can be saved without that faith 
which the Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman 
Church holds, believes, and teaches.' ' 

Now the question is, what precisely is meant 
by this ? It certainly seems plainly contrary to 
what, as has been said before, we must admit 
as an evident fact ; namely, that the holy 
patriarchs, prophets, and saints of the Old 
Testament have always been believed to have 
been saved, and probably many others also, 
who lived in those times, when they could not 
possibly have held this faith, for the very good 



The Remainder of the Profession. 191 



reason that it had not then been made known 
to the world. .So that they do not come undei 
the general statement made here. 

But if we examine, we see at least that we 
need not concern ourselves with this seeming 
difficulty, for it is only said "no one can be 
saved," not "no one ever could have been 
saved." It is, then, at any rate only a question 
of the way in which we can be saved at the pres- 
ent time. 

But it has been already shown, in our dis- 
cussion of the article of the profession concern- 
ing " everlasting life," that there can hardly be 
a difference between those who are now living 
entirely out of the reach of the Catholic 
Church, and those who lived before our I^ord 
came down from heaven. For both the Catho- 
lic faith is equally impossible. And the same 
may be said for those (and there may be a 
good many such) who, though they have in- 
deed heard that there is an institution called 
the Catholic or Roman (perhaps they have 
known it as the Romish) Church, still have no 
suspicion whatever that it can possibly be the 
true Church established, by God on earth. All 
these people, whether the obstacle, so to speak, 
between them and the Church be time, space, 
or a prejudice for which they are in no way to 
blame, are said to be in " invincible ignorance M 
of the true faith, and we believe that they may 



192 The Remaiftder of the Profession. 



be saved, if they are faithful to the light and 
the means of grace they have, even if these are 
not sufficient to bring them into the true 
Church before the}' die. 

What is meant, therefore, by saying that no 
one can be saved without the faith of the Catho- 
lic Church, is not that an explicit knowledge of 
this faith is absolutely necessary, but that no 
one can presume to dispense with it, to take 
something else in its place, or to say, as so 
many do, that it makes ■ no difference what a 
man believes, as long as his life is right. This 
last idea, plausible as it seems to many, is 
obviously absurd ; for it assumes either that a 
man's life can be right when he is indifferent as 
to whether he knows or does God's will or not ; 
or that it is impossible there can be any truth 
revealed from heaven to show us how to live, 
and that all the information needed on that 
subject is not only attainable by our reason but 
even actually now in the possession of every 
human being. One might as well say, " It 
makes no difference whether a sea-captain has 
a compass and sextant or not, as long as he 
makes a straight track for the port he wishes to 
reach." Very true, no doubt; but how is he 
going to lay his course correctly unless he has 
the instruments which enable him to do so ? If 
he has lost his instruments, or is unable to pro- 
cure anything of the kind, God may be merci 



The Remainder of the Profession. 193 

ful to him and bring him safe to port without 
them; but to say, "I don't care about instru- 
ments, I can get along all right without,' ' is 
simply fool-hardiness. Just so it is fool- hardi- 
ness for any one to say, " I can save my soul 
without the faith of the Church, and I don't 
care whether it is true or not." If he, through 
the fault of his ancestors, has lost sight of the 
faith altogether, or if he has always lived in 
some remote part of the world to which it has 
not penetrated, he may be saved like the igno- 
rant mariner, by a special mercy of God ; but 
this special mercy cannot be expected if, when 
the faith is attainable, he neglects to avail him- 
self of it. He is then like the captain who, 
passing through the city where instruments can 
be got, neglects to procure them, though he has 
the money in his pocket. 

So you see that what is meant by saying that 
no one can be saved without the Catholic faith, 
is substantially the same as saying that no one 
can reach his port safely without instruments. 
No one can be saved without it ; that is, no one 
can be saved who wilfully rejects or neglects it. 

But it must also be said that salvation is 
difficult for those who, even without their own 
fault, are deprived of -the faith, just as naviga- 
tion is difficult for the seaman even without his 
fault, deprived of what he needs, or-success im- 
probable in any handiwork without the proper 



i'94 The Remainder of the Profession. 



tools. For one inculpably ignorant of the faith, 
though not punished for that, is 3-et necessarily 
deprived of the great aids which it furnishes for 
the forgiveness and the prevention of sin in 
general. He is, like other people, conceived 
and born in original sin ; ordinarih r this is only 
removed b}' baptism. Christ Himself says : 
"Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be 
born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he 
:annot enter' into the kingdom of God 99 

ohn iii. 5). Still, the Church believes that 
those for whom baptism is practically impossi- 
ble can be saved if they have sufficiently per- 
fect dispositions, loving and turning to God 
with their whole heart. This we call the bap- 
tism of desire. 

But even should original and actual sin be 
taken away in this manner, still the temptation 
to sin remains, and the weakness to resist 
which original sin, and perhaps actual sin also, 
has caused. This is the case with baptized 
Christians also, and with Catholics as well as 
others. A battle, it may be a long and a hard 
one, has to be fought with sin before the king- 
dom of heaven can be won. But the Catholic 
in this battle is helped and fortified by the 
Sacraments, to which the unbaptized have no 
access, and of which the Protestant is prac- 
tically ignorant. For we believe, and facts 
which we cannot properly discuss in a book of 



The Remainder of the Profession, 195 



this kind justify us in believing, that there 
are no valid clerical orders among Protestants 
properly so-called, except in some rare in- 
stances; the Protestant, then, even though he 
be validly baptized, has no access to the Sacra- 
ment of Penance ; and indeed few Protestants 
make any endeavor to avail themselves of it. 
If then, after once receiving the grace of God 
he should be so unfortunate, as is only too pro- 
bable, to fall into mortal sin, it must be for- 
given him without this great help ; this is in- 
deed possible, but it is comparatively difficult, 
as will be seen more clearly later. Then there 
is for him no Real Body and Blood of Christ in 
the Holy Eucharist to strengthen him and give 
renewed life to his soul. . " Except you eat the 
flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, 
you shall not have life in you,'' says our Lord 
(John vi. 54); and though no one can eh hold 
that salvation is impossible without the actual 
reception of Holy Communion, still no doa^t it 
is for Catholics practically necessary for tie 
nourishment of the soul, for the extirp tion of 
vicious habits and the formation of solid virtue, 
and for perseverance to the end, on which 
everything depends. And if it is so for Catho- 
lics, why not for others as well? 

Again, the Protestant has no Sacrament of 
Confirmation by which to receive the permanent 
grace of the Holv Ghost to make his faith solid 



ig6 The Remainder of the Profession. 



and firm against the assaults of the enemy ; no 
Sacrament of Extreme Unction, to prepare him 
for his last combat. He has to leave the world, 
as our great poet sa}^s, " unhouseled, dis- 
appointed, unaneled"; how many chances are 
against him, even though he be in perfectly 
good faith about his religion, and trying to do 
his very best ! 

These difficulties of which I have spoken do 
not exist to the same extent in those churches 
which, like the Greek and other Oriental ones, 
have retained valid orders, and have, except in 
what would now be considered by people in 
general as matters of small consequence, the 
same doctrine as the Catholic Church. What 
separates them from us is principally what we 
call schism, for which their individual members 
can hardly, as a rule, be to blame, and which 
moreover has not deprived them of the means 
of grace established in the Church. Russian 
soldiers, for instance, were attended by French 
priests in the Crimean war ; they had always 
been accustomed to receive the sacraments, and 
expected them at the hour of death as they 
had during life. ) 

You see now, I think, what is meant by our 
saying that no one can be saved without the 
faith which the Catholic Church teaches. 
Principally that no one can be saved by some 
so-called faith or opinion which he selects for 



The Remainder of the Profession. 197 

himself, knowing or suspecting that the Church 
established by Christ proposes something else 
to him ; secondarily, that without the means of 
salvation placed in the Church by Christ, salva- 
tion is extremely difficult. And it would be 
even more difficult probably than it actually is, 
were it not that to those who are without any 
fault of their own deprived of these means of 
salvation, God in His mercy makes the combat 
somewhat easier, as it would seem \ taking 
away from such, perhaps, some of the tempta- 
tions to which they might otherwise be ex- 
posed, or, as we may say, " tempering the wind 
to the shorn lamb," For He "will have all 
men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge 
of the truth " (I. Tim. ii. 4), at least so far as 
it is morally possible for them. 

There is another article in this preamble 
which is likely to give difficulty ; that in which 
it is said, " I am ready to observe all she com- 
mands me." To the consideration of this we 
will devote a separate chapter. 



CHAPTER XVII. 



THE PRKCKPTS OF THK CHURCH. 
S you read the words just mentioned, "I 



Zjl am ready to observe all she commands 
me," I should not be at all surprised if they 
suggested most unpleasant ideas. They really 
must seem, to one having the usual prejudices 
against the Church, to mean that every Catholic 
must be ready to undertake any duty which it 
may please the Pope, or the bishop, or any one 
else who is his lord and master, to assign him 
to. He might be required, for instance, to 
blow up the Capitol or the White House v or 
to poison his own father or mother ; very well, 
if the Church commands this, these words 
would seem to settle the question. He would 
have, if we take them in the sense in which 
they might easily be taken by Protestants, to 
go right to work and do what he was told, with- 
out any fuss or scruple. 

But though this idea may seem natural 
enough, in reality it is nothing but a mon- 
strous bugbear. Catholics would be amused at 
any such sense being taken from the declara- 
tion or promise of which we are speaking. For 
wery Catholic man knows that there is no such 




The Precepts of the Church. 



199 



personal authority which issues special com- 
mands to him. The priest of his own parish is 
the nearest approach to such an authority ; but 
whatever commands he has to give are given 
out in public in the church, and are simply in- 
structions or requests to join in some good work 
which is on foot, in which every one should help 
according to his opportunities. 

You will, however, say that at xeast the 
priest gives injunctions of a personal character 
in the confessional. This is true, of course e 
But the commands or directions there given 
have reference only to the good of the soul of 
the penitent ; they are either to the effect that 
he must give up his sins, or the occasions of 
sin — that is to say, the places, persons, or occu- 
pations which are causes of sin to him ; or they 
are the prescribing to him of certain prayers or 
pious works by way of what we call penance, 
to be offered up in atonement or satisfaction for 
sins, according to what has been said in the 
previous chapter on purgatory. 

Now, I know all this may be very different 
from your idea of the relation between priest 
and people. You are accustomed to regard the 
people as being what Protestants call ' ' priest- 
ridden.' ' The fact is that it is really the other 
way. The people are not priest-ridden, but the 
priest is people-ridden. He is, if he have any 
relations with the people at all, pretty much at 



200 The Precepts of the Church. 



their beck and call, without any time he can 
call his own; it is they who are issuing their 
commands to him, to go on this or that .sick- 
call, to hear and advise them in their troubles or 
in their business, to baptize their children, or to 
hear their confessions. The priest, especially 
1 in any large city parish, is really the slave of 
the people ; bound to attend to the interests of 
each and every one of them at all hours of the 
day and night, and getting in return a salary 
which only just suffices for his maintenance, 
and which no man, even though unmarried 
like the priest, w 7 ould think of working for if 
he had the ability and education which a priest 
necessarily must have. 

This is really the whole fact of the matter in 
a nutshell. But it is a simple matter of fact, 
not deducible from any principle ; it might be 
the other way, and probably would be the other 
way were the Church not a divine institution, 
animated and operated by the Spirit of God, 
which can and does inspire man to make sacri- 
fices which he could not make naturally. To 
prove, then, that it is a fact, I can only give 
you my own testimony, which is also that of 
others who know what the state of the case is. 
And I do not say that there have not been, or 
that there are not now exceptions to what I 
have given as a rule. Sometimes a priest, in 
spite of his holy calling, may be worldly ; and 



The Precepts oj the Church. 201 

he may be ambitious and tyrannical ; and if he 
wishes to be so, he has some opportunity, on 
account of the love and respect which good 
Catholics have fcr the priesthood, though he 
cannot carry such conduct far without correc- 
tion from his bishop. But that in any case, by 
his own authority c:* that of his superiors, he 
issues special orders to the laity, employing 
them either individually or collectively in the 
nefarious schemes which exist only in the 
Protestant imagination, is utterly untrue and 
absurd. 

But the matter must, as I have said, rest on 
testimony. If you will not take that, it can be 
settled in no other way except by your coming 
into the Church yourself, and seeing for your- 
self how things are. So, having done all I can 
to remove this false impression, I will proceed 
to give you the true meaning of these words in 
the profession of which we are speaking. It 
may be observed, however, that they do not re- 
quire the convert to do all that the priest tells 
him, but only what the Church itself tells him ; 
so if you are not sure, after all, that what I 
have said is correct, there is at least this to fall 
back on. 

Now, then ; what does the Church command 
us ? Only a very few and simple things. They 
are commonly called by Catholics the ' ' precepts 
of the Church," and they are as follows : 



202 



The Precepts of the Church. 



1. To hear Mass on Sundays, and all holy- 
days of obligation. 

2. To fast and abstain on the days com- 
manded. 

3. To confess our sins at least once a year. 

4. To receive the blessed Eucharist at 
Easter. 

5. To contribute to the support of oui 
pastors. 

6. Not to solemnize marriage at the forbidden 
times ; nor to marry persons within the forbid- 
den degrees of kindred, or otherwise prohibited 
by the Church ; nor clandestinely. 

A short explanation of these precepts will 
now be in order. 1. The / first regards the 
sanctification of Sundays and holydays. It is 
a fixing with precision of the matter com- 
manded in the Decalogue. As the command- 
ment stands there, it is, " Remember that thou 
keep holy the Sabbath day." The manner of 
keeping the Sabbath holy among the Israelites 
was principally by abstaining from work. Be- 
sides the Sabbaths, other holy times were desig- 
nated by Moses (I,ev. xxiii.), namely, the 
phase, pasch or passover, the day of atone- 
ment, and the feast of tabernacles. To these 
others were subsequently added by the Jewish 
Church or Synagogue ; and besides the abstain- 
ing from work, sacrifices and other religious 
observances were enjoined. 



The Precepts of the Church, 203 



Now, the precise times to be sanctified and 
the manner of the sanctification have evidently 
been much changed in the New Dispensation. 
One thing especially is manifest, that by the 
general consent of almost all Christians, the first 
day of the week is the one now to be kept holy, 
not the seventh, as formerly. We observe Sun- 
day as the day for worship and for rest, not Sat- 
urday, as in the Old Law. Evidently, also, the 
sacrifices enjoined by the Old Law are no 
longer offered. It is clear, then, that unless 
some great and horrible mistake has been made, 
which can be hardly regarded as possible, these 
changes have been made in accordance with the 
will of God, and by competent authority. This 
authority Catholics believe to have been that of 
the Church of Christ; and as nothing is re- 
corded in the Scripture as having been distinct- 
ly arranged by our Lord Himself in the matter, 
we are really obliged to rest our present observ- 
ance practically on the word of the Church, as 
contained either in distinct documents or in 
ecclesiastical tradition.. 

It is, then, somewhat strange that in the face 
of these manifest changes, acquiesced in by 
almost all Christians, Protestants should still 
make so much of the letter of the Old Testa- 
ment with regard to this matter; that they 
should call Sunday the Sabbath, and maintain 
that everything regarding the Sabbath must 



204 The Precepts of the Church. 



now be observed on Sunday. And it is stranger 
still that they should have added a tradition of 
their own, forbidding any sort of recreation on 
that day, when it is not recreation, but work, 
that w r as prohibited in the Old Law. The nat- 
ural meaning of work is something which is 
laborious or tiresome ; if we stretch it farther 
than that, we must, unless it can be interpreted 
in some way for us, conclude that every move- 
ment of the body or exercise of the mind is 
work, and then the only thing left is to go to bed. 

And w y e do not find in the Bible that even 
religious observances of any kind are enjoined 
on the Sabbath. It was evidently fitting that 
there should be such, and such was the reason- 
able interpretation made by the Jews of the law 
of Moses ; but taking the letter of Scripture, as 
they involve work, they also should have been 
omitted. ^ 

The fact is, that the Church of the Old Law 
construed and interpreted this commandment, 
though it is clear that its interpretation, or at 
least that of the Pharisees, was too strict, since 
our Lord Himself disregarded and condemned it 
in various instances, as in curing the sick on 
the Sabbath day, and plucking and rubbing the 
ears of corn (Luke vi. i). It also, as we have 
seen, instituted new holydays (Judith xvi. 
31, Esther ix. 27-28, I. Machabees iv. 59). 
Though the record of these is not in all cases 



The Precepts of the Church. 20$ 



in what you would accept as the Word of God, 
still it is unquestioned history; the last feast, 
moreover, is mentioned in the New Testament 
(John x, 22). 

If, then, the Church of the Old I,aw had and 
exercised these powers without reproof except 
for a too strict and rigorous interpretation, why 
should not that of the New Law have a similar 
authority ? 

It has simply followed in the footsteps of the 
Synagogue in its action. The greatest change, 
or new departure, was in the substitution of 
Sunday for Saturday, in honor of the Resurrec- 
tion of Christ, intimated (John xx. 19, and Acts 
xx. 7, I. Cor. xvi. 2), and adopted by Christians 
generally. It has definitely formulated the way 
of observance of Sunday, or given us the com- 
mands of Christ in this respect not recorded in 
the Bible ; and if its regulations as to this mat- 
ter are not binding on us, nothing is, as those 
of the law of Moses have necessarily disap- 
peared with the change of the day. It has 
established new feasts in honor of the principal 
events and mysteries of our Redemption, as the 
Synagogue of the Jews did for the principal 
events of God's providence toward them. What 
reasonable objection can be made to all this ? 

It is now time to see just what the Church 
does prescribe concerning Sundays and holy- 
days. 



2o6 The Precepts of the Church. 



First, as given above, the attendance at Mass 
on these days. The Mass, as has been ex- 
plained, is the great service of the Church ; it 
is eminently fitting and proper that this should 
be one selected as of obligation. This is all 
that is absolutely required in the way of wor- 
ship on these days; it is, however, the desire 
of the Church that Catholics should spend the 
rest of the day in a pious and religious manner ; 
and particularly that they should also attend 
the afternoon or evening service known as 
Vespers. But experience shows that more 
than the attendance at Mass cannot be pru- 
dently commanded under pain of sin. 

How, then, is the rest of the day to be spent ? 
In the first place, servile work is to be avoided. 
By this is meant fatiguing labor of the body, 
such as most men have to perform during the 
week to procure their daily bread. Mental 
work, such as reading or writing, is not forbid- 
den ; neither is artistic or scientific occupation ; 
and it is immaterial whether compensation is 
or is not expected for what is done. But one is 
not allowed to do servile work for satisfaction, 
for exercise, or to pass away the time; this is 
as much forbidden as that done for pay would 
be. Recreation or play, if it be innocent, is 
allowed; but it should not be such as would 
interfere with the public worship of God, or 
with the peace of those who wish to spend thfe 



The Precepts of the Church. 207 

day in prayer or quiet ; nor should it bo such as 
would produce excitement or fatigue. The 
Church is always opposed to noisy and excit- 
ing festivities, particularly on Sunday, and of 
course to intoxication, debauchery, or any 
amusement which would probably be an occa- 
sion of sin. All these latter things would be 
wrong on any day, but especially on a day 
which should be spent in a closer union with 
God. 

Work, however, required by necessity, piety, 
or charity is allowed ; such as the cooking of 
food, the daily care of the house, preparation 
for public worship, attendance on the sick, etc. 
It is unavoidable also that some should work in 
order that others should be able to go from 
place to place for reasonable recreation or neces- 
sary business ; and also, some must do so be- 
cause the work in which they are engaged is 
of a character that cannot be altogether sus- 
pended, as the care of furnaces which cannot, 
without great loss, be allowed to go out. And 
no one is obliged to suspend work if by so 
doing he would lose his occupation and have 
to starve. It is a misfortune that such should 
be the case with any one ; but as things actual- 
ly are it evidently cannot be helped. 

Of course, excuse for one's regular work on 
holydays other than Sundays is much more 
common, as abstinence from it, unless the 



208 The Precepts of the Church. 



country were all Catholic, would be probably 
attended by danger of losing one's occupation 
altogether. All are expected, however, to hear 
Mass on those days, if a Mass is provided at an 
hour at which they can be present without 
great inconvenience. And no one should do 
servile work voluntarily or unnecessarily on 
those days am r more than on Sunday. 

In this country there are only a few such 
days through the year ; namely : 

1. New Year's day. 

2. Feast of the Ascension of our Lord. 

3. Feast of the Assumption of the B. V. 
(August 15). 

4. Feast of All Saints (November 1). 

5. Feast of the Immaculate Conception of the 
B. V. (December 8). 

6. Christmas Day. 

The first and last of these are prett} r generally 
recognized as public holidays. The addition 
of the four others to the fifty-two Sundays of the 
year makes really very little difference. 

2. The second precept of the Church con- 
cerns fasting and abstinence. These are two 
different things, though often confounded, even 
by Catholics. 

By ' 1 abstinence 1 ' is meant abstaining from 
flesh meat. All the world knows that the 
regular practice of good Catholics is to abstain 
from meat on every Friday. The only excep- 



The Precepts of the Church. 



209 



tion to this is when Christmas falls on that day 
of the week. This Friday abstinence is of 
course, in commemoration of the death of 
Christ, which occurred on that day. It is 
manifestly fitting that Christians should under- 
go some suffering on the day on which Christ's 
great sufferings were endured. 

Protestants are not usually inclined to admit 
this, however, alleging that it is useless, super- 
stitious, and presumptuous for us to afflict our- 
selves in this way, and that it derogates from 
the dignity of our Saviour to have us put our- 
selves in His place in this way. This at least 
seems to be their idea in opposing it. But in 
this they are contradicted by Christ Himself; 
His words are given in Matt. ix. 15, Mark ii. 
20, Iyuke v. 35. When He was asked how it 
was that His disciples did not fast as the Jews 
did, He said that as long as they had the bride- 
groom (that is, evidently, Himself) with them, 
they could not fast ; but that the days will come 
when the bridegroom shall be taken away from 
them and that then they shall fast. And such 
was actually the case from the earliest ages of 
the Church. Afflicting the body by depriva- 
tion of food and other means is no modern in- 
vention ; on the contrary, it was practised 
much more in the beginning of the Church 
than now. St. Paul bears witness to this 
most clearly when he says (I. Cor. ix. 25-27) \ 



210 * The Precepts of the Church. 

"Every one that striveth for the mastery re* 
fraineth himself from all things, and they in- 
deed that they may receive a corruptible crown, 
but we an incorruptible one. I therefore so 
run, not as at an uncertainty : I so fight, not as 
one beating the air. But I chastise my body, 
and bring it into subjection, lest perhaps, when 
I have preached to others, I myself should be- 
come a castaway." 

In these words of St. Paul we see the idea of 
what Catholics call bodily mortification. It is 
different from that of penance or satisfaction, of 
which I have already treated. It is this : that 
most of our temptations to evil come from the 
lusts or desires of the bod}' ; that our sensual 
appetites rise up in rebellion against what our 
souls know to be right and reasonable. The 
body endeavors, so to speak, to assume the' 
mastery over the soul, and too often succeeds, 
as, for example, in the lamentable case of the 
habitual drunkard. It must be compelled, 
therefore, to take its proper place, as the ser- 
vant, not the master, of the soul : and the- only 
real way to do this is to deprive it of even what 
it might lawfully have. The experience of 
man shows that unless the body is sometimes 
deprived of lawful enjoyments, the soul will not 
be able to refuse it unlawful ones. It must be 
accustomed to obey simply for obedience's sake. 

Those Christians who have a strong desire 



The Precepts of the Church, 



All 



for God, and wish to pass much of their time in 
prayer and union with Him, find this mortifica- 
tion necessary in a higher degree than the: 
Church requires it to be practised. For the 
body, even though kept in reasonable subjec- 
tion, is still with its various needs and demands 
a burden and a distraction to the soul, and the 
more these bodity needs can be lessened the 
better. The soul gains at the expense of the 
body. Holy men at all times have found that 
by treating the body with great severity its de- 
mands can be much lessened, and it can be 
made indifferent to many things it naturally 
craves ; its tastes and its daintiness can be over- 
come, and the soul be thus freed to a great ex- 
tent from attending to its wants. 

We may put the matter in another, and 
really a more correct way. For after all it is 
not the body of itself and alone that desires 
satisfaction or pleasure ; it is the soul which 
desires bodily pleasure, and often prefers it to 
that which is higher and better. By resolutely 
turning from the lower pleasure the soul is 
weaned from it, and the appetite and desire for 
the higher is strengthened in it. The soul 
must have something to desire ; and the more 
it turns from the world and its pleasures, 
whether bodily or otherwise, the more it desires 
those things which the world cannot give or 
take away ; the less it seeks the creature for its 



212 



The Precepts of the Church 



own sake, the more will it seek the Creator. 
This is the underlying principle of all mortifica- 
tion, which may be applied to riches and honors 
as well as to bodily needs. 

But to resume our explanation of the particu- 
lar precept of the Church of which I am treat- 
ing. By "fasting" is meant in general the 
deprivation not of some particular kind of food, 
like meat, but the taking less food than the 
appetite craves. As specially formulated by 
the Church, it is the restricting ourselves to one 
full meal, instead of taking three in the day. 
In the strict rule of the fast, no breakfast or 
supper is allowed ; this, however, has been so 
far relaxed as to permit a supper of eight ounces 
weight, and a cup of coffee or tea with two 
ounces of bread in the morning. The fast also 
properly includes abstinence from meat ; but 
in L,ent dispensation is generally given for 
meat several times a week at dinner. 

Those w r ho are sick, or who have to work 
hard, those under twenty-one or over sixty 
years of age, and some others, are excused from 
fasting ; excuse from abstinence is much more 
difficult, as this can generally be observed with- 
out detriment to health or unfitting one for 
work. 

3-4. "To confess our sins at least once a 
year" ; this is the third precept of the Church. 
More frequent confession than this is reconi- 



The Precepts of the Church. 213 



mended by the Church, but yearly confession 
is required by this positive command ; so that 
one who has committed grievous sin, and passes 
over this time without confession, which must 
of course also be accompanied by repentance, 
commits a distinct sin by this, in addition to 
those which may already be on his soul. As, 
however, confession is usually followed by Holy 
Communion, this and the following precept, 
that of receiving the Eucharist at Easter, prac- 
tically fall into one, that of making what we 
call the Easter duty. The precept, as you see 
it here, reads " at Easter" ; but as it would 
be impossible for all to receive Communion on 
that exact day, the time is extended, according 
to the regular law of the Church, a week on 
each side ; in this country we have a still fur- 
ther extension, namely, from the first Sunday 
in Lent, six weeks before Easter, to Trinity 
Sunday, eight weeks after Easter ; so that a 
time of fourteen weeks, or more than a quarter 
of the year, is allowed here for this duty. 
Every Catholic of an age to receive Communion 
must receive at some time during this period, 
no matter how often he may have done so at 
other times during the year that has passed. 

I say "every Catholic of an age to receive 
Communion " ; and here it will be well to say 
a word to remove a false impression that Prot- 
estants naturally have. With them only cer- 



214 The Precepts of the Church. 



tain persons, perhaps a small proportion of the 
congregation, are communicants ; but with us 
it is not so. Every Catholic is, by the right of 
his or her baptism, usually received in infancy, 
a communicant ; and is expected to make his 
or her first Communion in childhood, usually at 
about the age of ten or eleven, and to receive 
regularly after that ; once a month is what is 
expected. 

Many, however, do not receive as often as 
that, especially after they have been thrown 
into the temptations and distractions of the 
world ; neither, of course, do they go to con- 
fession. And too often we find Catholics who 
neglect even the yearly Easter duty of which 
these commandments treat, and that year after 
year. Protestants do not seem to understand 
this ; they take for granted that every Catholic 
goes to confession regularly, and then ask how 
is it that they confess their sins and still go on 
committing such grievous ones as, of course, all 
know that some Catholics, as well as others, do 
commit. They seem to think that a drunkard, 
a thief, or one living in evident impurity, if he 
be a Catholic, goes to confession just as assidu- 
ously as any one else. In fact, such a proceed- 
ing would be almost unheard of. Any Catholic 
living in sin which he has not really made up 
his mind to abandon would not get absolution 
if he did go to confession, unless he imposed on 



The Precepts of the Church. 215 

the priest by a pretended repentance ; and such 
hypocrisy is very rare, for Catholics have a 
horror of making a bad confession or Com- 
munion. Of course there are some who are 
really struggling against sin, who do go to 
these sacraments with some frequency ; but 
next to none go with a conscious purpose to re- 
main just as they are. 

That many should keep their faith, and re- 
main in the Church, though making no attempt 
to lead a Christian life, was distinctly predicted 
by our Lord, in the parables of the wheat and 
cockle or tares, and the net cast into the sea, 
gathering together all kinds of fish, both good 
and bad, which are recorded in the thirteenth 
chapter of St. Matthew's gospel. Attempts to 
found or carry on a church consisting only of 
good people can only result in hypocrisy. 

Please, then, before you blame on the Church 
the scandalous conduct of any Catholic, find 
out whether he goes to the sacraments regu- 
larly or not. 

5. "To contribute to the support of our 
pastors' ' is the fifth precept. It is plain that 
the clergy must be supported in some wa}^, as 
they are not allowed to undertake any business 
which can supply them with an income. In 
Catholic countries they are sometimes paid by 
the State, which, of course, makes them really 
supported by the people; but in this state of 



216 The Precepts of the Church. 



things there is no special application of this 
precept to the conscience of the individual 
Christian, as he will be obliged to do his share 
without thinking of it. But I need hardly say- 
that here there is no such provision, and it is 
probably best that there should be none. Its 
place is supplied by the collections taken up in 
church. These collections and the rents paid 
for seats have, however, also another object, 
that of providing for the ordinary running ex- 
penses of the church, or other undertakings 
connected with it, such as the parochial school. 
Every one is evidently bound in conscience to 
contribute to these collections, whether ordinary 
or special ; both on account of justice, for no 
one can have a right to occupy a seat paid for 
with other people's money, and also on account 
of charity, for ever} 7 Catholic is, of course, 
bound in this way to help on the good work of 
the church generally, though some part of it 
may be of no immediate benefit to himself. 

A great deal of nonsense is often talked 
about priests being grasping and avaricious, 
about their always talking about mone} T , etc. 
It is perfectly plain to any one who knows any- 
thing about the matter, that priests do not want 
the money for v hich they ask for themselves, 
but for the work of the church. They are not 
obliged to carry this on by their own private 
means, even if they were able to do so ; but as 

\ 



The Precepts of the Church. 2iJ 



a rule they have no such private means, for 
priests seldom come from rich families. The 
people must then furnish them with the money 
required for the expenses of the Church and of 
the diocese, also that which is needed for the 
poor and for charitable institutions, and for 
foreign missions ; to say nothing of what is re- 
quired for the building of churches and schools, 
or other extraordinary expenses. People gen- 
erally hardly realize how great these expenses 
altogether are, and fail grievously in respect of 
this precept, which, after all, is not so much a 
precept of the Church as an obligation coming 
from the very nature of the case. Putting a few 
pennies on the plate of a Sunday, which is all 
that some people in comfortable circumstances 
do, is very far from being a fulfilment of this 
obligation ; to do no more than that is certainly 
for such a grievous sin of omission. 

It is true, however, that this commandment 
is, to some extent, complied with by the offer- 
ings which are customarily made on the occa- 
sion of baptisms and marriages. - These are not 
required by the priest as a condition of perform- 
ing the ceremony ; still, they cannot be con- 
sidered as simply voluntary, as without them 
the revenue of the church would not be suffi- 
cient. 

6. The last precept concerns the matter 
of marriage. By "solemnizing marriage' ' is 



218 The Precepts of the Church. 



meant having what is called a 11 nuptial mass,' 1 
or indulging in notable festivity or display on 
the occasion ; marriage itself is not absolutely 
forbidden at the times which are proscribed, 
though the custom of Catholics is not to entei 
on it at these times without a grave reason 
The times are from the beginning of Advent to 
the feast of the Epiphany (Jan. 6) , and from the 
beginning of L,ent to one week' after Easter. 

With regard to the degrees of kindred, the 
Church forbids marriage between people as 
nearly related as what are called third cousins. 
It also has established other prohibitions to ex- 
plain which would occupy too much space, and 
also probably lead to misunderstanding; the 
only safe way for parties intending marriage is 
to notify the priest in time, in order that he 
may examine into the special circumstances of 
the case. In most of the cases in which mar- 
riage is prohibited, it is also considered invalid 
by the Church ; so that the matter is evidently 
one of the greatest importance. 

What is meant by marrying clandestinely is 
being married by any other person than the 
priest of the parish to which the parties belong ; 
two witnesses are also required, that the mar- 
riage be not clandestine. 

Now here, you see, we have what is meant 
by ' 1 being ready to observe all that the Church 
commands me, M These precepts or regulations 



The Precepts of the Church. 219 



which have been given are evidently only such 
as would be expected to be made by any organ- 
ization of which one is a member ; they do not 
compare in number with those made by the 
State, which are generally submitted to without 
a murmur. And, as you see, there is nothing 
of a personal character about them; they 
bear equally on all, with due regard to the 
different circumstances of individuals. They 
are simply laws, such as any well-ordered com- 
munity must have ; and the wonder is not that 
they exist, but that they are so few and easy. 

In this matter, of course, I am speaking of 
the obligations of the laity. The clergy are 
under much more strict control. Not only are 
there many laws specially for them, restricting 
their freedom of action, but they are also sub- 
ject to personal direction from superiors, from 
which the laity are practically exempt. This 
is evidently necessary for the proper discharge 
of their special duties ; but it is a matter which 
need not concern any one else ; and no one can 
enlist in their ranks without knowing the obli- 
gations which he is incurring. 

But it should be distinctly understood, that 
both laws and precepts made by superiors of 
any kind, either in the Church, the State, or 
family, do not bind when they are evidently con- 
trary to the dictates of conscience. And it 
must also be remembered that the Church does 



220 The Precepts of the Church. 



not claim infallibility for herself or for trie Pope 
in matters of law, precept, or government gen- 
erally, but only in formal decisions concerning 
faith and morals. So that if — though it is 
really a practically impossible supposition — the 
Pope were to order any Catholic to commit 
murder or any other crime, the command would 
not be considered as having any binding force, 
but would rather be an evidence of insanity on 
the part of him that would issue such an order. 
And the same would, of course, also apply to 
any bishop, or superior in a religious order, 
issuing such commands to his subjects. No 
one would think for a moment that any obliga- 
tion w r as attached to them. 

I think we have now discussed all the princi- 
pal matters requiring explanation in the pro- 
fession of faith which has made our text. As, 
however, there are other points which give dif- 
ficulty to many, and occasion of criticism or of 
objection to the Church, it will be well to 
devote some space to the consideration of at 
least the more prominent of these. 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



INDULGENCES AND DISPENSATIONS. 

TT is probable that there is among Protestants 
*■ a more obstinate — for I really must say so 
— and a more complete misunderstanding on the 
point of Catholic doctrine named first in the 
head of this chapter, than on any other. I say 
1 ' obstinate ' ' ; for the truth on this point has 
been stated so repeatedly that it seems impossi- 
ble that it should not have been, at least to a 
great extent, accepted in the Protestant world 
by this time, had it not been for a firm deter- 
mination not to accept it, and to regard us as 
either deceivers or deceived regarding it. We 
find the word ' 1 indulgence ' ' continually under- 
stood by Protestant Christians, and even stated 
in their books, as being a permission to commit 
sin. In itself this misunderstanding may not 
be so extraordinary or unnatural ; for indul- 
gence, in the common English sense, certainly 
does often mean an allowance or permission to 
do some things which would otherwise be 
against the rules. We generally mean by an 
" indulgent " father, for instance, one who does 
not keep a very tight rein on his children, but 
allows them to do various things which a more 

221 



222 Indulg ences and Dispensations. 



strict one would forbid. And we also mean by 
1 ' indulging ' ' ourselves, allowing ourselves 
pleasures which, if we were very conscien- 
tious, we should avoid. When we indulge 
ourselves, it is understood that we turn aside 
somewhat from the path of duty. 

But the word indulgence has another sense, 
too. A father would also be called indulgent 
if he, while making strict rules for his children, 
and appointing punishments for their infrac- 
tion, should be moved by compassion for the 
children so as to remit some portion of these 
punishments, and try to correct their faults by 
love and kindness rather than by fear and 
severity. 

Now, this latter is the idea attached to the 
word indulgence, in the sense in which it is 
used by the Church. 

To understand it more clearly let us look 
into the facts of history. 

In the early days of the Christian Church 
severe penalties were appointed for those who 
fell into grievous sins, especially when those 
sins were public and scandalous. Of course, 
these penalties or penances could only be in- 
flicted after the repentance of those who had 
sinned ; for while still continuing in their sin 
they would not submit to them. The most 
common ones were in the way of fasting, which 
might continue with more or less strictness for 



Indulgences and Dispensations. 223 



years. A long time also intervened in some 
cases before the offenders could be restored to 
the full communion of the Church; and they 
were required to remain also in a separate place 
by the door at public service. It is hardly 
necessary to go into details concerning this 
matter ; still a few examples may be given to 
show the rigor of this ancient discipline. Its 
rules were too numerous for us to do more than 
take a specimen here and there. 

1 . If any one shall do any servile work on a 
Sunday or holy day, he shall do penance three 
days on bread and water. 

2. He who breaks the fast in Lent, for each 
day shall do penance for seven days. 

3. He who curses his parents, shall be peni- 
tent forty days on bread and water. 

4. An usurer, three years, one on bread and 
water. 

5. An adulterer, five to twelve years, accord- 
ing to circumstances. 

6. A mother guilty of infanticide, twelve 
years. 

7. If any one shall swear falsely through 
avarice, he shall sell all his goods and give the 
price to the poor ; and entering a monastery, do 
penance* all his life. 

Of course these were different in different 
parts of the Church, and at different times. 
As time went on, and the fervor of the faith* 



224 Indulgences and Dispensations. 



ful became somewhat relaxed with the greater 
prosperity of the Church, it was found impossi- 
ble to get these severe penances performed, and 
it became evident that if they were still insisted 
on, the effect would be to prevent repentance 
rather than to insure its being thorough and 
sincere ; so, naturally, a true zeal for the salva- 
tion of souls required a reduction of their rigor, 
and that for them some easier works of penance 
should be substituted. This substitution of the 
easier for the more difficult w 7 as known by the 
name of an indulgence. At the present day it 
is found impracticable to enjoin much penance 
beyond what the second precept of the Church, 
which has just been explained, requires, except 
to those who are exceptionally pious and fer- 
vent ; so that the prayers and works which 
have taken the place of the old canonical pen- 
ances, and which are now called indulgences or 
indulgenced prayers and devotions, are, as a 
rule, very easily performed. 

They are divided into two classes, plenary 
and partial. The plenary indulgence is at- 
tached to certain works, usually somewhat con- 
siderable, though no more than can bo per- 
formed by any one really anxious to satisfy for 
his sins, and is understood as making such 
works an equivalent for all that ought to be 
done in that way ; the partial, to works or 
prayers less in amount. Partial indulgences 



Indulgences and Dispensations. 225 



are given as covering a certain space of time, 
as a year, forty days, and the like ; by this it 
is meant that they are substituted for the canon- 
ical penance which would formerly have been 
assigned for that length of time. 

Now, one thing about this matter must be 
specially noted. As with the old penances, re- 
pentance is supposed to precede. Every Cath- 
olic knows perfectly well that it is of no use to 
try to get an indulgence while he is in the state 
of rnortal sin ; if he be in that state, he must go 
to confession first, and get into the state of 
grace and friendship with God by a hearty re- 
pentance and a real abandonment of his bad 
life ; then, if there be any indulgence to be 
had, as usually happens at the time of a mis- 
sion, for instance, he may hope to get the bene- 
fit of it, to satisfy, to some extent at least, for 
the temporal punishment still remaining for his 
sins. 

But, as a general thing, it is only pious and 
good people, who go to the Sacraments regular- 
ly, who make any effort to get indulgences, un- 
less on special occasions like that mentioned 
above. These good people have long ago re- 
pented of their sins, if indeed they ever had any 
mortal sins to repent of; at the same time, they 
have not the courage, or perhaps the strength, 
to undertake any severe penitential works ; so 
they try to get the benefit of these commuta- 



226 Indulgences and Dispensations. 



tions for the penance which their more heroic 
ancestors used to do, and which some do even 
now. 

Now, you notice that this whole doctrine im- 
plies a special efficacy in the way of satisfaction 
for forgiven sin, attached not merely to peni- 
tential works in general, but particularly to 
those appointed, and blessed, as it were, by the 
Church. As the old canonical penances were 
regarded as more salutary than an}'thing one 
could do of one's own accord, so these which 
are substituted for them have a like value. 
And it is also plain that, in theory, a work or 
prayer to which an indulgence of a hundred 
days is attached is the equivalent of the old 
penance performed for that time ; but as it is 
confessed that the actual benefit derived from 
this indulgenced work or prayer depends largely 
on the fervor w r ith which it is done or said, it is 
plain that this actual benefit of an indulgence 
is likely to be less than that of the old penance ; 
for to perform the penance required of itself a 
good deal of fervor, while to perform the work 
to which the indulgence is attached requires of 
necessity very little. All devout Catholics in- 
stinctively feel this, and therefore most of them, 
instead of being contented with one plenary 
indulgence, or a few partial ones, try to gain as 
many as they conveniently can. 

Now, of course I am aware that objections 



Indulgences and Dispensations, 227 



may be raised against the whole doctrine of 
temporal punishment for venial or for forgiven 
mortal sin, and also against the Church having- 
the power of making any special form of such 
satisfaction specially salutary ; but the main 
point about the matter of which we are now 
treating is that the whole doctrine of indul- 
gences has reference to this matter of satisfac- 
tion, and that the idea of their being permis- 
sions to commit sin is something which never 
occurs to a Catholic at alL It is simply a 
monstrous delusion which Protestants have 
somehow got into ; one which would indeed 
be ludicrous, were not the prejudice against the 
Church which it has created so lamentable. 

It is hard, I know, for a Protestant to give 
up this, perhaps, his greatest charge against 
the Church ; the one which he has seen over 
and over again stated as an historical fact, 
especially in connection with the Reformation. 
That Tetzel was selling permissions to commit 
sin, the price being a contribution to the build- 
ing of St. Peter's Church, is something he feels 
as certain of as that Christ lived and died. 
But the fact about that- matter was merely that 
Tetzel had authority to collect money for St. 
Peter's, as one might have nowadays for any 
church, the building of the church and the 
contributing to it being regarded, undoubtedly, 
as a good work ; and that to this good work the 



228 Indulgences and Dispensations. 



Holy See attached an indulgence — that is, it 
substituted this good work for the canonical 
penances, in the way that has been described. 
But, of course, no Catholic knowing his reli- 
gion supposed that it would do any good in 
that way to any one who intended to commit 
grievous sin, or to one who had not sin- 
cerely repented of all the grievous sins he had 
committed, and abandoned them for good. 

So much, then, for this monstrous and almost 
inconceivable misrepresentation. The only way 
of justifying or accounting for it is, that at the 
time of the Reformation the matter of preach- 
ing and explaining the faith and practice of the 
Church had been somewhat neglected, so that 
many Catholics were ignorant, in a great 
measure, of what the Church taught; and 
though it is hard to believe that L,uther, priest 
as he was, was among this number, still many 
could easily be persuaded, because they had 
not received much Catholic instruction, that an 
indulgence was something like what Protestants 
newdmagine it to be. Still, it is not probable 
that this error took much hold in the beginning 
of .the Reformation ; but as people got more and 
more separated from the Church, and out of 
reach of its voice, the false idea developed and 
took firm hold of their minds. 

And now a few words about a kindred sub- 
ject, one often confused with the one of which I 



Indulgences and Dispensations, 229 



have been treating. I mean the matter of dis- 
pensations, so called. 

What is a dispensation ? It is a relaxation 
of a law made by the Church, for some reason 
not sufficient in itself to excuse one from it. 
For instance, a person not sick enough to be 
'excused by the sickness itself from abstinence 
on Friday, may be excused by the authorities 
of the Church; the law is dispensed or its 
obligation removed in his particular case. Evi- 
dently it is in the power of any law-giver to 
release any one or more of his subjects from 
a law which he has made ; as he made the law, 
so can he also unmake it, And he can give 
permission to others, or delegate them, as we 
say, to dispense in this way in his name. In 
order, however, that a dispensation should be 
lawfully given there must, as I have said, be 
some reason for it, though not a reason enough 
in itself to excuse ; also this dispensation should 
not cause an undue burden to fall on others. 

But, it is plain enough that though a law- 
giver can dispense in his own law, he cannot 
dispense in the eternal laws of God, or the 
essential obligations of morality, for he did not 
make or constitute these. Dispensations, there- 
fore, are never given by the Church in matters 
of morality ; but only in those things which of 
themselves are indifferent, like that of absti- 
nence on Friday, as mentioned above. Some 



230 Indulgences and Dispensations. 



things, you see, are commanded because they 
are essentially right and obligatory, or forbid- 
den because they are essentially wrong. Others, 
on the contrary, are obligatory simply because 
they are commanded, or prohibited merely as 
being' against the law. As, for example, in 
secular legislation, there is no obligation in it- 
self to pay tariff duties until a law is made to 
that effect, and one can walk freely over the 
grass unless it is forbidden to do so by some 
special regulation. It is in matters only of this 
latter kind that the Church gives dispensations ; 
where she makes a lav for the general good, 
which without her legislation would not be a 
matter of obligation. But in matteis of the 
divine law she cannot interfere, except to inter- 
pret it where doubt may exist. She cannot say 
that any act is a sin against the divine law, and 
then give permission or dispensation for it, and 
she never does. If she could have done a thing 
like that, she could have saved England to the 
Church ; but she would not grant permission or 
dispensation to Henry VIII. to marry Ann 
Boleyn when he was truly married to Queen 
Catherine; for both divorce and bigamy are 
prohibited by the law of God. Luther and his 
companions were willing to strain a point to 
please the L,andgrave of Hesse, and subscribed 
a document to that effect ; but the Catholic 
Church cannot do such a thing. 



Indulgences and Dispensations. 231 



She will not allow the smallest thing, es- 
sentially sinful — even, for instance, the most 
trifling falsehood — for any consideration, how- 
ever important. 

Now one more matter, suggested by tnis, be- 
fore we conclude this chapter. It is commonly 
said by Protestants that we, and especially the 
Jesuits, maintain that one may do evil that 
good may come, or that the end sanctifies the 
means. 

It is curious that the same accusation was 
made in the very beginning of Christianity. 
St. Paul testifies to this : " And not rather (as 
we are slandered, and as some affirm that we 
say) let us do evil, that there may come good? M 
(Rom. iii. 8). 

When St. Paul condemned this doctrine you 
believe that he meant what he said, I know. 
You do not suppose him to be a Jesuit ; you do 
not think that he maintains a thing which in 
his heart he denies, as you perhaps believe the 
Jesuits do. And yet you see he was accused 
of this damnable doctrine, that the end sanc- 
tifies or justifies the means. 

Precisely the same is the case now. The 
accusation made against us of holding this 
doctrine is one for which there is not the slight- 
est shadow of real foundation ; there is none 
whatever in the formularies or decrees of the 
Church, nor is there any in the writings of a 



232 Indulgences and Dispensations, 



single Catholic theologian. On the contrary k 
Catholic writers on, moral theology, in which 
branch of science the question would occur, 
unanimously reject it. The Jesuits, who have 
given special attention to this science, do so 
most explicitly. Such a doctrine is neve* 
taught by any one in the Catholic Church pub- 
licly or privately ; unless it might be *by some 
unlearned layman who had been made to be- 
lieve by what Protestants say that such was the 
Catholic teaching, and thought it his duty to 
defend it as well as he could. No permission 
would or could be given in the Church to com- 
mit the smallest sin, even if the whole world 
could be converted to the faith by it. 

The only thing that could possibly be mis- 
taken — and that only by great stupidity or in- 
advertence — for such a doctrine is the common- 
sense judgment of theologians, that if an action 
has two results, one evil and one good, the evil 
can be permitted for the sake of the good, if the 
good is what is intended and is considerable 
compared with the evil. As, for instance, a 
military commander, engaged in a just war, 
can shell a town occupied by the enemy, 
though he knows that in all probability soi^e 
non-combatants, women or children, will be un- 
avoidably and unintentionally killed. He does 
not kill them as a means of killing the armed 
enemy; the latter is what he is trying to do, 



Confession. 



-'33 



the former happens simply because he cannot 
help it. 

Do not then, if you value truth or justice, 
make this absurd charge against us. And now 
let us go on to some other matters, where per- 
haps there is more excuse for some misunder- 
standing. 



CHAPTER XIX. 

CONFESSION. 

I HAVE already had something to say about 
the Catholic doctrine and practice of con- 
fession and absolution when speaking of the 
Sacraments, some time ago ; but as intimated 
then, the subject is such a prominent one and 
liable to so much misunderstanding, that it is 
better to give it a more full explanation. 

The Catholic belief about this matter is, that 
all who commit mortal sins after baptism are 
bound by the 'law of God to confess these sins 
to a priest ; and that this confession, or rather 
the absolution which is usually given by the 
priest after it, is the ordinary way in which sins 
committed after baptism are forgiven. It is not 
doubted, however, that they may be forgiven 
without the ministry of the priest if the sinner 
has what is called perfect contrition ; that is, a 
true and hearty sorrow for sin purely for God's 



234 



Confession. 



sake, joined, of course, with a firm purpose of 
avoiding it for the future, and of doing every- 
thing which God commands. But as the 
Catholic firmly believes that God commands 
confession for all sins after baptism, as has been 
said — and this whether the sins have been al- 
ready forgiven or not — it is plain that he goes 
to confession just the same in this case as in 
any other. 

In most cases, however, it seems that the 
sorrow felt for sin is hardly pure and perfect 
enough to insure its forgiveness without abso- 
lution. With absolution a lower and less per- 
fect sorrow suffices ; but even in this case there 
must be a true and genuine repentance founded 
on motives of faith, such as the fear of punish- 
ment in the next life, not on mere worldly con- 
siderations. And there must be a real turning 
from sin as such, so that the sinner would not 
commit it, even though he should be told that 
God would not punish him for future sins, or — » 
what is more practical and possible — that he 
would certainly have the grace of forgiveness 
later on. One who truly repents of his sins in 
a way to obtain forgiveness for them even with 
the help of the priest's absolution, must be so 
disposed that he would not go on committing 
them, even though he felt sure he would live 
ten or twenty years longer. It is to be feared, 
of course, that some who apparently repent and 



Confession. 



235 



confess their sins on their death-beds, or what 
they believe to be such, are not in these dis- 
positions, but are merely influenced by servile 
fear, as it is called ; that they turn from sin not 
because they hate it in any way, but simply and 
solely because they dread its punishment ; that 
they would send away the priest instantly if the 
doctor told them they were sure to recover, and 
not think of calling for him again till they 
again seemed to be in a similar emergency. 
Such, of course, are not forgiven even if the 
priest gives them absolution, as he probably 
will on the chance, however doubtful their dis- 
positions may seem to be. 

You see, then, that the dispositions of the sin- 
ner must be satisfactory in God's sight when 
he goes to confession, and that otherwise, ac- 
cording to Catholic doctrine, he is not forgiven. 
And I hope you see and believe what every 
Catholic knows perfectly well, that it is not the 
idea of confession simply to wash out an old 
score of sius, and have a clean slate to start 
with more on. Some Protestants imagine this ; 
that the Catholic goes to confession simply to 
report his sins, and have a suitable penance as- 
signed which will make the matter all right 
without further trouble. 

And perhaps you imagine a still more 
scandalous and outrageous thing yet ; namely, 
that the penance is largely in the form of money 



236 



Confession. 



paid to the priest. It has even been said that 
we have a regular schedule of sins, so much 
being paid for the absolution of each. It is thfc 
saine old idea as that about indulgences, except 
that the money is supposed to be handed over 
afterwards instead of beforehand. 

It is simply utterly false. Nothing of the 
kind exists ; indeed, it is in some dioceses ab- 
solutely forbidden to receive money in the con- 
fessional, though it may be due on some other 
account. But as for paying for absolution, it is 
a thing unheard of. There seems to be no es- 
sential reason why a voluntary offering should 
not be made on the occasion of confession, as 
well as on that of baptism or marriage ; but as 
it would be likely to lead to some abuse and to 
give scandal, to say nothing of discouraging 
frequent reception of the Sacraments of Pen- 
ance and the Eucharist, which the Church has 
much at heart, no custom of the kind could be 
tolerated. 

No, hearing confessions is on natural grounds 
a burden to the priest, and often quite a griev- 
ous one. This of itself would suffice to show 
that it is not a human invention, for there could 
be no possible inducement to the priesthood to 
institute a practice so full of labor, and putting 
such a strain as this does on patience, except 
the conviction that it was required by the la\K 
of God, 



Confession. 



23/ 



Of course it has its consolations ; for if there 
be " joy before the angels of God upon one sin- 
ner doing penance " (or as your version has it, 
■ 1 one sinner that repenteth ' - ; both mean the 
same thing) (L,uke xv. 10), so the priest can- 
not but be moved to joy when he sees a sinner 
turning to God ; and also he is edified and en- 
couraged when he sees, as he often does, how 
pure and free from sin, and how exalted in vir- 
tue, many souls have become which have been 
in this very sacrament repeatedly washed in the 
blood of the I^amb. 

One other mistake may be now mentioned ; 
it has been already alluded to in what has been 
said about the Pope. Some Protestants im- 
agine that the priest himself does not go to con- 
fession, or if he does, that he confesses to the 
bishop, and the bishops to the Pope. This is 
all nonsense. Priests go to confession far more 
frequently than the average of the laity ; they 
are expected to do so once a week, as they are 
expected to receive Communion every day ; for 
of course they receive when they say Mass, and 
this they should do daily. And they go, as a 
rule, to each other ; and the bishop would gen- 
erally confess to a priest ; even the Pope, as has 
been said, would do the same. 

Another absurd idea prevails regarding this 
matter; namely, on the notion just mentioned 
of priests confessing to the bishop, etc 0> it is 



238 Confession. 

supposed that they report what they hear in 
confession to him, and he to the Pope. And 
yet every one ought to know that the obligation 
of secrecy with regard to what a priest hears in 
confession is most absolute, admitting of no ex- 
ception whatever. A priest who was known to 
have broken this law would be immediately 
deprived of all right of exercising any office 
whatever in the Church ; but in point of fact 
such a case, is unknown. There is no authentic 
instance of this seal of confession being inten- 
tionally broken, even by priests who have lost 
the faith and left the Church ; and even in 
insanit}^ or delirium it does not appear ever to 
have been done. 

There is another matter still upon which it 
seems necessary to say a few words, though 
they ought not to be needed ; and every decent 
person must approach it reluctantly. It is the 
charge made against the Church that the con- 
fessional, so far from being a means by which 
souls are cleansed from sin, is made in practice 
a school of corruption, especially to persons of 
the other sex. This charge is made, as a rule, 
in the first place by certain apostate priests, who 
profess to speak from experience. Others make 
it on their authority. The simplest answer to 
it is, that if such is the experience of these 
priests, so much the worse for them personally ; 
if there has been corruption in the confessional 



Confession. 



239 



in their experience, who but themselves can 
have been the parties guilty of it? 

The sole foundation for any general charge 
of this kind is that, as all kinds of sins must be 
confessed, those relating to impurity cannot be 
excepted. It is then stated, as an obvious con- 
sequence from this, that what are called " ob- 
scene' ' questions must be asked, and in point 
of fact are asked, by priests of penitents. 

I reply : to say that such questions, or that 
any questions at all, must necessarily be asked, 
is not true. If a penitent is able and willing 
to tell the sins which have to be told without 
questioning, so much the better. If, however, 
it is x difficult, as it may naturally be, to do 
so, some questions may have to be asked to 
make it easier, and also to prevent matters from 
being stated which really are not necessary, but 
which the penitent may imagine to be so. But 
that such questions must be and are in fact 
obscene, is again a falsehood. As well might 
one say that a physician must necessarily be 
obscene in nis treatment of patients, or that 
physicians, as a rule, are so. The physician 
has to treat diseases of the body ; the priest, 
those of the soul ; both, to do any good, must 
know just what is the matter; the cases are 
parallel. But neither need act or speak im- 
purely or obscenely in doing so. What, then, 
but a malignant hatred of the Church can make 



Confession. 



any one say that a respectable physician can be 
trusted, but that a priest cannot; that a physi- 
cian, who often makes no pretence to be spe- 
cially conscientious, will avoid sin, while a 
priest, whose conduct is otherwise blameless, 
will commit it? The charge is not only one 
of sin, which no one makes against physicians 
as a rule, but also of most horrible hypocrisy 
and sacrilege ; for the doctor is often nothing 
but a man of the world, while the priest re- 
ceives and dispenses the Sacraments daily. 
What right have you to make such a hideous 
accusation? The priest's duty can be done 
with the greatest prudence and delicacy, as 
well as the doctor's ; why should not he, as 
well as the doctor, do it in this way? It is 
simply monstrous to say that as a rule, almost 
without exception, he does or says anything in 
this matter which would be wrong." 

I do not deny that there may be a rare excep- 
tion here and there. One who never should 
have been a priest may take upon himself this 
sacred calling in spite of all the pains which «.re 
taken to prevent this ; and having done so, he 
may abuse it. But we have a very strict law 
to provide for such cases. Every penitent of 
either sex to whom a priest in confession may 
have used words with an obviously corrupting 
and immoral intention is bound, under penalty 
of mortal sin and the refusal of absolution, to 



Confession, 241 

denounce such a priest to his bishop ; and any 
priest who is found to be really guilty in this 
respect is most severely reprimanded and de- 
prived of his office. So that even an evil-dis- 
posed priest can only be guilty of such ar* 
offence by some incredible folly. 

But, you may say, at least is not the priests 
mind, even if pure at the beginning, necessarily 
corrupted by all the sins which he is obliged to 
hear, and which, perhaps, previously he was 
ignorant of? Strange as it may seem, I say it 
is not, and this for several reasons. In the first 
place, by a peculiar disposition of things, which 
hardly seems altogether natural, though no 
doubt it is partly so, a priest after hearing con- 
fessions, say for an afternoon or evening, really 
forgets almost all that he has heard. Some- 
times if a person comes back who has been in 
the confessional only a little while ago, the 
priest has to make an effort, often an unsuccess- 
ful one, to remember anything about his case. 
One thing blots out another. Secondly, custom, 
making the hearing of sins more monotonous 
and tiresome, destroys the attraction they might 
otherwise have. Thirdly, sins are not told by 
sincere penitents in a way to tempt the listener. 
Fourthly, if some one should come with a pre- 
tended confession in order to produce such 
temptation, not only would the priest naturally 
be alarmed and horrified, but also he would 



242 



Confession. 



remember another point of the same law that 
has been mentioned, namely, that any exterior 
consent, though only verbal, to such an at- 
tempt would subject him to the same report 
being made to his bishop as in the other 
case. 

I hope that what has now been said with 
reference to this nasty calumny and the un- 
worthy suspicion caused by it will suffice. I 
regret that it should be necessary to say so 
much about it ; but the gravity of the charge 
makes it unavoidable. 

In point of fact, the influence of the confes- 
sional, outside of the supernatural benefit of 
absolution which we believe to be attached to 
it, is good both for priest and penitent. The 
former learns compassion for the weakness of 
human nature ; also humility, for he sees how 
he also might have fallen into great sins had 
not God mercifully preserved him ; also care in 
guarding against the occasions and temptations 
which have proved so dangerous to others. 
The latter frees his mind of secrets which were 
weighing on it ; he knows the evil and the 
danger of sin better than before ; he- also knows 
the obligations of justice or of charity which he 
is under; he receives advice how to guard 
against sin for the future, and how to advance 
in the way of virtue. This last matter, which 
is known as spiritual direction, is the most 



Confession. 



243 



efficacious of all means for spiritual advance- 
ment. 

We have a great abundance of treatises on 
the spiritual life, and these are, no doubt, of the 
greatest profit to the reader ; probably there are 
fifty to a hundred of such works among us to 
one which Protestants have. And what won- 
der ; for they have no fixed principles to start 
with, they are always discussing and changing 
their creeds, and never can advance to anything 
beyond. But a word or two addressed per- 
sonally to one's self, and based on one's own in- 
dividual needs, even if spoken by one who is 
himself only moderately advanced in learning 
or sanctity, is often more efficacious than a 
whole book. One piece of advice given by 
one who knows the heart and soul is better 
sometimes than a long talk from the best of 
friends who have not such knowledge, or than 
the most eloquent of sermons. 



CHAPTER XX. 



THE CEUBACY OF ?HK CI/ERGY. 

AS we have been speaking about the clergy 
with relation to this matter of the confes- 
sional, this seems an appropriate time also to 
discuss another subject concerning them about 
which remark is often made; that is the one 
which forms the title of this chapter. Clerical 
celibacy is regarded by those outside the 
Church with feelings both of admiration and of 
dislike. No one can fail to see that an un- 
married man is more absolutely free to attend 
to his work than one who has the care of a 
family ; and also that he can afford to work for 
a smaller salary ; so that a body of unmarried 
clergy can be supported with less demand on 
the money of the people than would be required 
were they married. It also appears pretty clear 
that if a clergyman is what he ought to be — ■ 
determined, that is, to serve God faithfully, he 
not only can but will do so with less distraction 
to what may be called side issues than if he had 
a wife and family to attend to. I know that the 
Protestant idea is that a good wife is a positive 
help to a minister ; that she will make him bet- 
ter and more zealous than he would be without 

244 



The Celibacy of the Clergy. 245 

her. St. Paul, however, it must be admitted 
by Bible Christians, is something of an author- 
ity on this point; and he says: "He that is 
without a wife, is solicitous for the things that 
belong to the Lord, how he may please God. 
But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the 
things of the world, how he may please his 
wife; and he is divided." 

It may, of course, be urged that this disad- 
vantage is more than made up for in other ways, 
at least for those clergymen who are regularly 
settled in the care of a parish. We hardly 
agree to this ; still the Catholic Church does 
not exclude from her communion certain coun- 
tries in which this custom prevails, and if 
Russia, which is such a country, were recon- 
ciled to Rome to-morrow, it is probable that 
this discipline would still be tolerated there. 
But there is not the slightest probability that 
the rule of celibacy will ever be changed in 
countries at present Catholic, or in Protestant 
countries like England or America. 

And one word should here be said with regard 
to the married clergy of a country like Russia, 
and of other countries either united to the Catho- 
lic Church, or separated from it, which have a 
similar discipline. 

The clergy of these countries are married be- 
fore ordination ; in other words, the candidate 
for Holy Orders is expected or even required to 




2 \6 The Celibacy of the Clergy. 



be a married man, unless he belongs to a reli- 
gious order, of which I shall have more to say 
shortly. Whereas, in the properly Roman 
system such candidate is expected to be un- 
married, and must, if married, no longer live 
with his wife, though the bond of marriage re- 
mains unbroken. This latter plan has, how- 
ever, proved objectionable, and at present is not 
allowed in practice. 

But the Roman, Greek, and Oriental 
churches agree that a man cannot marry after 
ordination. So if the wife of a priest, whom he 
has married before ordination, should die, he it» 
not allowed to marry again. This rule w T as ob- 
served from the earliest times throughout Chris- 
tendom, though the special discipline of the 
Roman Church is of later institution. 

So the taking of a wife by a priest, and 
especially by a bishop, after receiving his or- 
ders, was an innovation of the Reformers, not 
warranted in any way by Christian tradition. 
In the case of Luther and some others it was a 
double or triple violation of the rules of the 
Church, for Luther was not only a priest, but a 
monk ; and the wife w r hom he took was a nun. 

But to return to the consideration of the es- 
sential advantages and disadvantages of celi- 
bacy. I think that all will really admit, that 
for the efficiency of the clergy it is better on the 
whole than the state of marriage ; the only 



The Celibacy of the Clergy. 247 



thing that seems in the minds of Protestants to 
be a conclusive argument against it is, that it 
produces immorality ; that it is impossible, or 
at least highly improbable, that an unmarried 
clergy can be actually chaste and pure. In 
short, they regard virginity, at least in men, to 
be practically out of the question ; that is the 
plain statement of the case. 

This is, of course, an insult against the Catho- 
lic clergy ; it is a deliberate accusation against 
us, not only of grievous sin, but also of most 
damnable hypocrisy ; for that we profess to lead 
pure lives there can be no doubt. But further- 
more, the charge, even abstractly made, is a 
direct denial of the words of Christ Himself. 
For we read in the nineteenth chapter of St. 
Matthew's gospel, that when those who heard 
the strictness of the law laid down by Him con- 
cerning marriage, said that according to this 
law it would not be expedient to marry (v. 10) , 
He warned them against such a conclusion be- 
ing taken as a general rule ; " All men," He 
says, " take not this word, but they to whom it 
is given" (v. 11). But nevertheless he en- 
couraged and advised some to adopt it ; " He 
that can take, let him take it"- (v. 12). 

Now, these words were not said ironically ; no 
one could think that. They were said serious- 
ly, inviting men to follow His own example, 

I would advise you also to read the opening 



248 The Celibacy of the Clergy. 

of the fourteenth chapter of the Apocalypse, or 
Revelation of St. John. He says : " I beheld; 
and lo a Lamb stood upon Mount Sion, and 
with him an hundred forty-four thousand hav- 
ing his name and the name of his Father 
written on their foreheads. And I heard a 
voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, 
and as the voice of great thunder ; and the 
voice, which I heard, was as the voice of harpers, 
harping on their harps. And they sung as it 
were a new canticle before the throne, and be- 
fore the four living creatures, and the ancients : 
and no man could say the canticle, but those 
hundred forty-four thousand, who were pur- 
chased from the earth. These are they who 
were not defiled with women : for they are vir- 
gins. These follow the Lamb whithersoever 
He goeth. These were purchased from among 
men, the first-fruits to God and to the Lamb ; 
and in their mouth there was found no lie ; for 
they are without spot before the throne of God. ' 9 
I think I have said enough to show that no 
Christian can maintain that virginity is a thing 
practically impossible for men, even to be pre- 
served through life ; and that the hundred and 
forty-four thousand is meant to represent not an 
exact but a very large number :s plain from 
another passage in the same revelation (chapter 
vii.), where the same number is represented as 
those saved among the children of Israel, Cer- 



The Celibacy of the Clergy, 249 



tainly that would be a pitiful proportion to at- 
tain salvation among all the hundreds of mil- 
lions that will have lived of God's chosen people. 

It is no more, then, than right Christian 
faith, as well as fairness and justice to your 
neighbor, to believe that in the mouth of the 
Catholic priesthood professing chastity as they 
do, " there is found no lie." Exceptions there 
may be and no doubt have been in all ages of 
the Church ; there was a traitor even among the 
Apostles. But that the very great majority of 
the clergy of the Church live as they claim that 
they do, is not only possible, but certain. 

And the same thing is true of the religious 
orders, both of men and women. They, how- 
ever, besides renouncing marriage and living in 
chastity like priests, also abandon the use of 
property by the vow of poverty, and the free 
exercise of their own wills by the vow of obedi- 
ence. They makk every possible sacrifice of 
what men value in this world ; and why ? In 
order to have a closer union with God. 

I have said something in the chapter on the 
precepts of the Church concerning mortifica- 
tion; that is, the abandoning of the good things 
of this world for God's sake. The religious 
orders carry this to the highest degree And 
let no one say that to do so is superstition ; for 
it has the direct sanction of Christ. Read the 
last verses of this same nineteenth chapter of 



250 , The Celibacy of the Clergy. 



Matthew which I have already called your at- 
tention to. You will find there an account of a 
young man who told our Lord that he had kept 
all the commandments, and Christ did not con- 
tradict him ; but He said, M If thou wilt be per= 
feet, go sell what thou hast, and give to the 
poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven : 
and come, follow me.' * Peter, moved by this, 
and by what our Lord also said about the diffi- 
culty of salvation for the rich, said to Him : 
" Behold, we have left all things and followed 
thee ; what therefore shall we have ? • ' Christ 
made to him and his companions first special 
promises on account of their apostolic office ; 
then He said: " And every one that hath left 
house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or 
mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my 
name's sake : shall receive an hundred-fold, and 
shall possess life everlasting." 

The same thing is related in the tenth chap- 
ter of St. Mark's gospel, and the eighteenth of 
that according to St. Luke. And the Christian 
who would maintain that our Lord does not en- 
courage what priests and the religious orders 
practise, has really no resource but to cut these 
chapters out of his Bible. 

In the beginning I have represented the cell- 
bacy of the clergy as if it were principally in- 
stituted for the sake of greater efficiency and 
exterior application to the work of the ministry. 



Modern Miracles. 



251 



But really its principal reason is that the priest 
by giving up special human relations of love, 
however good in themselves, may love God 
more ardently and be united more closely with 
Him ; and that his love of his fellow-men may 
be on this very account more intense and self- 
sacrificing, while it is at the same time more 
supernatural and impartial. And the constant 
experience of all Christian times shows that the 
experiment, if so it may be called, ha? been a 
signal success. 



CHAPTER XXI. 

MODERN MIRACLES. 

ONE of the great objections to the Catholic 
Church in the minds of at least a good 
many Protestants, is that she claims that 
miracles are still worked within her pale. 

Of course it is easy to see that those who da 
not believe in the Church would naturally 
doubt or deny that she had in any way a spe- 
cial gift or prerogative of miracles, for such a 
gift would be inconsistent, at least if frequently 
or abundantly manifested, with their theory 
about her ; it would seem to show, if admitted 
as a fact, that she was really a Divine institu- 
tion. Naturally, then, Protestants must dis- 
credit Catholic miracles, or at any rate refuse 



252 



Modern Miracles. 



to admit that they are worked with the fre- 
quency that we claim. One or two, here and 
there, they might allow, just as we can allow 
are, or may be, worked outside the Church; 
as, for instance, Balaam had the miraculous 
gift of prophecy at least on one occasion (Num- 
bers xxiv.) To show even more clearly that 
such may be the case, we find in St. Mark's 
gospel the following account : ' ' John answered 
him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out 
devils in thy name, who followeth not us, and 
we forbade him. But Jesus said : Do not forbid 
him. For there is no man that doth a miracle 
in my name, and can soon speak ill of me. For 
he that is not against you, is for you 99 (ix. 37- 
39) . But the habitual or frequent working of 
miracles, especially in a permanent institution 
like the Catholic Church, or the working of 
miracles in attestation of a special doctrine, as 
that of Elias against the prophets of Baal (I. 
Kings xviii.) is a different matter altogether. 

It is then natural, as I have said, that Catho- 
lic miracles, as we allege them to occur, should 
be disallowed by those outside the Church ; and 
that — though it might be admitted that a few 
were genuine — they need not be examined into 
specially, as it would be deemed impossible 
that any great number of them could be well 
supported, or that they could have any special 
significance. And furthermore, it is natural 



Modern Miracles. 



253 



that Protestants should be indignant at our 
claiming that miracles are not infrequent 
among us ; for this seems like falsely arrogating 
to ourselves a special mark of Divine favor. 

Nevertheless, taking this ground cannot 
make the Bible Christian altogether easy. 
For, it is recorded in the sacred text that our 
Lord distinctly predicted that his disciples 
should work miracles. "Amen, amen, I say 
to you, he that believeth in me, the works that 
I do, he also shall do, and greater than these 
shall he do. Because I go to the Father' 9 
(John xiv. 12-13). 

The only Protestant way of accounting for 
this prediction not being verified at the present 
day — for that it is verified among Catholics can- 
not, of course, be supposed for a moment — is to 
take the ground that "the age of miracles has 
passed.' ' Of course the Bible does not say 
that it was going to pass ; Christ's words, given 
above, seem to apply to those who should truly 
believe in him in every age. But there is no 
other way out of the difficulty except that of be- 
lieving what Catholics say. 

So Protestant Christians are pretty well 
agreed on this view of the matter. But I am 
afraid that some of them are slipping away 
gradually to a somewhat lower ground. They 
accept the miracles of the Bible because they 
have always been accustomed to take them as a 



254 



Modern Miracles. 



matter of course ; but they hardly realize them 
as facts. Not admitting such things as occur- 
ring nowadays, they are gradually coming to 
think that they could hardly have occurred 
then. 

There is, it is true, a kind of reaction setting 
in lately in favor of the supernatural. Still, it 
has a hard fight to make in the minds of non- 
Catholics against the claim so loudly made by 
many scientists that the laws of nature are im- 
mutable. People have come, on account of 
this claim, to regard the laws of nature as 
being very much like those of mathematics, 
essentially inherent in the very nature of things. 

Now, there is really no scientific basis — and 
here I speak as a scientific man — for this state- 
ment about the immutability of the laws of 
nature. All that scientific men can say truly 
is, that in the observations and experiments 
that they make they do not find these laws 
changing ; that the apparent anomalies which 
present themselves have been found to be re- 
ducible to law, and that it is reasonable to pre- 
sume they can always be thus reduced. But to 
say that it is absolutely certain, for instance, 
that one particle of matter will always attract 
another according to the law of gravitation, or 
other laws working regularly, is evidently to 
make matter independent of its Creator ; it is to 
deny that God has any power to control or alter 



Modern Miracles. 255 

the action of the creatures which He has made. 
It is really then to deny the existence of God ; 
for the necessary idea of God is that He is 
omnipotent. 

Now, of course, any man, scientific or other- 
wise, may, if he choose, deny the existence of 
an almighty God ; but that such denial can be 
a scientific statement is simply impossible, for 
physical science — of course it is in that sense 
we are using the term — does not and cannot 
handle that question. All wise and prudent 
scientists acknowledge this, and confess that in 
their discussions they are only speaking of the 
existence and operation of various physical 
causes ; that they cannot tell for certain from 
their investigations whether there be any cause 
behind these or not. The most they can say is 
that nature does not prove the existence of God 
to them ; but to say that it disproves it would 
be absurd. They may say that God is unknow- 
able on the lines on which they work ; we need 
not inquire whether this is true or not ; but sc 
far they are speaking as scientists ; that is, they 
are making a statement about the matter which 
is their specialty. But when they say that He 
is unknowable on any other lines, they are 
going beyond the bounds of their science ; and 
when they say He does not exist, they are 
going a very long step further. They are 
talking as foolishly as one would talk who, 



256 



Modern Miracles. 



having lived all his life in a dark cellar, should 
announce as the result of his observations, that 
it was simply impossible there should be such 
an object as the sun. All he can rightly say is 
that the observations he has been able to make 
do not indicate anything of the kind ; that he 
sees no reason to believe that there is anything 
brighter in existence than his gas jet or kero- 
sene lamp. 

Christians, then, need not be in the slightest 
degree affected by statements of this kind from 
scientists. We believe there is an omnipotent 
God ; and it necessarily follows from this, that 
He can change the laws of nature if He 
chooses. You probably will admit that God 
can control the action of our minds, and compel 
us to think this or that ; why, then, can He not 
direct or entirely change the action of a piece 
of brute matter, either permanently or tem- 
porarily, if He desires so to do ? 

But now I want to call your attention to a 
point generally overlooked in this question 
about miracles. And it is this; that what is 
truly called a miracle is not necessarily a sus- 
pension or change of the laws of nature at all. 
If that were admitted as the definition of the 
word, it would be hard to show that most of the 
miracles related in the Bible were truly such. 
Take, for instance, the passing of the Israelites 
under Moses through the Red Sea. It is not at 



Modern Miracles. 



all necessary here to suppose that the laws caus- 
ing water to seek a level were suspended ; no 
more in this case than in the case where the 
waters are similarly divided by the hull of a 
ship as it passes along. In this latter case the 
laws are working all the time ; but their opera- 
tion is temporarily resisted by the pressure of 
the ship's sides. So all we have to suppose in 
the case of the division of the Red Sea is that 
a force like that of the pressure of a ship's sides 
acts on the water, causing it to stand up, as 
the Scripture tells us, ' ' as a wall on the right 
hand and on the left." 

Now, we know of no scientific apparatus 
which will produce such an effect without the 
introduction of a material visible object, like a 
ship ; but who can say for certain that such an 
effect might not be produced by some invention 
yet to be made? To suppose, however, that 
Moses was in possession of such a scientific 
secret, would evidently be the wildest imagina- 
tion. But to one who believes in the existence 
of mighty beings such as the angels are, ac- 
cording to the representations of Scripture, the 
problem presents no difficulty. If to four 
angels (Apoc. vii. 2) power was given to 
hurt the earth and the sea, surely to even one 
of them such a task as this would be very 
light, without having the laws of nature sus- 
pended at all. 



358 Modern Miracles. 



Belief, then, in what is often and rightly call- 
ed a miracle, simply requires belief in the exist- 
ence of beings in themselves imperceptible to our 
senses, but able to produce effects which are 
perceptible, and whose forces are not exerted in 
obedience to any regular laws, in the sense in 
which we understand that term as applying to 
nature. The fact is that our own voluntary 
movements are of the nature of miracles, only 
prevented from being called so by the frequency 
of their occurrence. If only one of our species 
were gifted with the faculty of locomotion, the 
rest being stationary and incapable of move- 
ment except under the influence of external 
forces, like trees, the movements of this one 
w r ould seem to the rest miraculous, especially if 
only seldom occurring. His aim should hang 
down by his side, in accordance with the law 
of gravity, unless raised by some other force 
acting according to law, that is, always in the 
same way in the same circumstances. But we 
should find that in the same physical circum- 
stances it sometimes hangs down, sometimes is 
raised. If it was only raised several times in 
his life, the raising would be a miracle; we 
might — if it were possible under our supposed 
conditions — investigate physical laws for ever, 
but we should never be able to explain it. 

To illustrate this further, let us now suppose 
the man's soul, which causes bodily movements 



Modern Miracles. 



259 



in some way that we are familiar with, but 
probably shall never be able in this life to fully 
understand, to be separated from his body ; or 
in other words, that its usual way — whatever 
that may be — of operating on the body is at an 
end ; in short, that the man is dead. Of course 
I am here assuming, as I have a right to do, 
that the soul can exist without a body. Now, 
let us suppose that a new way is provided in 
which it can operate on the body, so that the 
body gets up and walks, for instance; here we 
have a miracle. And yet its action on the body 
is no more reducible to purely physical laws 
before he dies, than it would be should it 
occur after death. 

Now, what absurdity it would be in a sci- 
entist to maintain that such a thing could not 
possibly happen! He may say indeed, U I do 
not believe that there is any such thing as a 
soul, or at least a disembodied one 9 9 ; but he 
knows perfectly well that he cannot prove this 
by scientific investigation. He is sure, or if he 
is not, everybody else is, that while he is alive 
and well he can raise his arm or not, as he 
chooses ; how can he be sure, or make any one 
else so, that he cannot do so after his body goes 
through the change which we call death? 

All he can say is, M Such phenomena have not 
come under my observation 99 ; or, in common 
unscientific language, M I never saw anything ol 



260 



Modern Miracles. 



that kind." But the phenomena which he ob- 
serves in himself and other beings like him- 
self during life, he knows perfectly well cannot 
be accounted for by physical laws ; he would 
not be such a fool as to attempt to formulate 
laws by which it could be infallibly determined 
what his own or anybody else's actions would be 
for a single day. He may succeed in doing that 
for the clouds and the winds ; but if he tried to 
do that even for himself, he would most certainly 
break them. Why, then, cannot a dead body, 
or any other mass of matter, perform actions un- 
accountable by physical laws ? 

The fact is, then, as has been said, that mir- 
acles may almost universally be accounted for 
by supposing the existence of beings acting 
voluntarily as we act, but disembodied and im- 
perceptible to our senses, and possessed of more 
or less power over material things ; or if we are 
indisposed to admit that — though no sound 
reason can be given for such indisposition — by 
granting the existence of one such all-powerful 
Being, who acts in and controls nature on cer- 
tain occasions without breaking the laws of 
force He has implanted in it, any more than we 
break them when we so act in and control it 
frequently, as we actually do. 

But, as has just been remarked, no sound 
reason can be given for restricting these ex- 
traordinary occurrences to the immediate action 



Modern Miracles. 261 



of this one Being. And not making any such 
restriction is not only more reasonable, but it 
better explains what, in spite of some scientists, 
are really observed facts, which they would do 
well to heed. 

It leads also to the classification of these oc- 
currences into distinct groups. We find some 
in which, the interference with nature being 
directed to no good end, it would appear that 
the beings causing it are malevolent in their 
action, and are simply allowed thus to exert 
their bad will ; others in which there is a good 
end or effect, in which case it is to be supposed 
they are benevolent, and act in obedience to 
God, or with His approval ; thirdly, some in 
which it seems more or less clear that the ac- 
tion is that of God Himself ; as would naturally 
be inferred if it should seem that His laws of 
nature were in the instance suspended. For 
it is His own action which constitutes the laws ; 
His, therefore, it would be to suspend them. 
It is His to give power to His creation ; His, 
therefore, to take away that which it regularly 
and constantly exerts ; for it exerts it in imme- 
diate and constant dependence on Him, and it 
is not for others directly to interfere with it, 
though they may neutralize it by contrary ac- 
tion on their own part. 

It is, of course, a difficult matter to tell for 
certain to which of these three classes a pheno- 



262 



Modern Miracles. 



menon occurs which cannot be accounted for 
by natural laws combined with human agency ; 
so that it is hard to be sure of the significance 
of such phenomena. It is a very dangerous 
mistake to confidently adduce those which can 
well be produced by evil spirits as foundations 
of a new religion, or testimonies to some par- 
ticular doctrine; that is plain enough. It is 
equally or more so to ascribe what are really 
the works of God or His angels to devils, as 
the Jew r s did in the case of the miracles of our 
Lord. "Dearly beloved,' 1 says St. John, " be* 
lieve not every spirit, but try the spirits if they 
be of God ; because many false prophets are 
gone out into the world" (I. John iv. i). It 
would be well if this advice was heeded by 
those who become interested in modern spirit- 
ism ; we frequently see persons who have 
scoffed at its 1 ' signs and wonders 1 ! as being 
mere humbug and trickery, become convinced, 
and on good grounds too, that such is not al- 
ways the case, and then suddenly jump to the 
conclusion that the alleged truths which they 
are adduced to prove are really such. Simply 
that some spirit asserts some fact with regard to 
the future life is in itself no more a proof that 
it is really a fact, than that some man asserts 
some fact with regard to this life. The man 
may be a liar; so may the spirit too. 

The Church has tests which it applies for the 



Modern Miracles. 



263 



discernment of preternatural occurrences, vis- 
ions, revelations, and the like. St. John indeed 
gives such a test in the very place I have 
quoted. He goes on to say (v. 2): " Every 
spirit, which confesseth that Jesus Christ is 
come in the flesh, is of God." This was ap- 
plicable specially, and intended specially for, 
the lying spirits of his time. 

I have said it is a difficult matter to discern 
the spirits ; it is also a difficult matter to tell 
whether any spirit at all be concerned in the 
matter, for it may of course be merely natural. 
Here also the Church is fully on her guard. 

Protestants generally imagine that the Catho- 
lic Church is extremely ready to accept ap- 
parent miracles worked within her pale as be- 
ing really V-zh, and to palm them off on the 
people. They think that we are really stuffed 
by the Church with miracles and legends. It 
is true that a great many have been reported in 
all ages of the Church, and are to be found in 
some books, particularly in the lives of the 
saints ; but it is well understood by us that the 
Church does not make herself responsible for 
all such stories, or build in any way upon them. 

The Church simply proceeds in the following 
reasonable way : First, she admits that super- 
natural or preternatural events, divine or dia- 
bolical, may occur at any time. To deny this is 
simply folly ; Rousseau himself has said that 



264 Modern Miracles. 

those who do so are only fit for a lunatic asy- 
lum. I would not go quite so far as that. 

Secondly, as to the great majority of such 
alleged events she passes no judgment at all ; 
she allows them to be told, and believed by 
those who choose to believe them, as long as 
they are not in themselves of an absurd or 
superstitious character. She also allows us to 
privately believe them to be of divine or angelic 
origin, as long as they do not tend to immoral- 
ity or impiety. 

But thirdly, when she is called on to pass a 
judgment as to their genuineness and their 
source, and to allow them to be used injier 
name as a proof of any doctrine, or of the holi- 
ness of any individual by whose co-operation 
they are said to have been brought about, she 
proceeds with excessive care and caution. 

This principally occurs in the canonization of 
saints ; that is, in the definite determination on 
the part of the Church as to whether or no it is 
certain that some person, one who has died 
with a reputation for great and extraordinary 
virtue, really was possessed of such virtue, and 
has therefore become in the next life specially 
near and dear to God ; so that he or she can be 
confidently proposed to the faithful in general 
as a model for their imitation, and safely and 
profitably invoked by them as an intercessor 
before God. 



Modern Miracles. 



265 



On such occasions a most strict inquiry is 
made into the life of the person in question, not 
only by collecting testimony as to his good and 
virtuous acts, but also by trying to pick flaws in 
his virtue, to see if some weaknesses or imper- 
fections cannot be found in his character or 
actions, not serious in themselves, but enough 
to prevent his being considered an eminent 
model of sanctity. 

Inquiry is also made as to whether he per- 
formed any miracles in his life-time ; but the 
most important thing is to ascertain whether 
any have been worked since his death as a re- 
sult of prayers asking his intercession. Catho- 
lics are inclined to address requests for miracu- 
lous favors, especially for cures in dangerous 
illnesses, to such as they believe to have 
crowned an eminently holy life by a good death, 
and who, they think, may be already in heaven 
without having had to pass through purgatory. 

It is necessary for the canonization of a saint 
that two miraculous favors should be clearly 
shown to be obtained after his death by his in- 
tercession. There are often rumors of quite a 
number, but most of these are dismissed as im- 
possible of proof and unworthy of attention. 
The evidence for those which are examined is 
sifted very carefully, and every possible objec- 
tion raised by an official specially appointed fot 
that purpose, the ground befog fought step by 



266 



Modern Miracles. 



step. Those which are rejected often have far 
more than the usual evidence which is deemed 
sufficient in a court of law. The result is con- 
vincing to all who do not take the ground, 
which has been shown to be absurd, that a 
miracle is impossible, and that no amount of 
evidence can prove it. 

I trust that you see that in this matter the 
Church simply takes the ground of common 
sense. At least, if you were in the least degree 
familiar with the actual facts, you would see 
that it is absolutely certain that miracles do 
occur, in accordance with the promise of Christ, 
quite frequently among us ; but, of course, with 
the real miracles some false ones are mixed up. 
To prove the truth or reality of a miracle, it 
must be examined ; it is merely a question of 
evidence, when we once admit the possibility 
of it, as all sensible men must do, even though 
they may not believe in God. For to disprove 
His existence, and the existence of invisible 
spirits in general, free from the constraint of 
physical laws is, as has been remarked, simply 
impossible. It is hard enough in most cases to 
prove a negative; in this case it cannot be 
done. 

The Church does examine a miracle, when 
anything depends on it. The rest she does 
not definitely approve; nor, as a rule, does she 
condemn them; she lets them stand on their 



Modern Miracles. 



267 



own merits. Have you any wiser course to 
suggest ? 

I would advise you to look into the evidence 
upon this matter a little. This subject is so 
vast that of course I cannot begin to discuss it 
here, nor could it be treated in any one book. 
But for a beginning, perhaps, nothing better 
could be selected than the account of the mira- 
cles at the shrine of Our I^ady of gourdes, in 
France, These are quite recent, and going on 
at the present time ; and books about them can 
be got at any Catholic book-store. If you read 
about them, you will have some difficulty in 
believing that * ' the age of miracles has 
passed/ 1 They are not legends, or nursery 
stories, but hard solid facts. If you once take 
up this subject in earnest, you will find that 
•'there are more things in heaven and earth 
than are dreamed of in your philosophy," 



CHAPTER XXII. 



SUPERSTITION. 

CONNECTED with the subject I have been 
discussing is a general charge made 
against us, which I have already partially re- 
futed. It may be expressed in this way. A 
Protestant will say : ' ' I do not doubt that you 
Catholics are sometimes quite pious, especially 
the more intelligent among you ; many of you 
probably worship God in spirit and in truth, 
nearly as well as we do ; but such are better 
than their religion. The great mass of your 
people are chock-full of superstition ; they 
think everything of holy water or a blessed 
candle, and believe that such things are going 
to save their souls ; and the worst of it is, the 
Church encourages them in these ideas. Why, 
you will hear men, or even boys, among you 
cursing and swearing, and they think that 
makes no difference as long as the priest has 
put what you call a scapular round their 
necks.' ' 

Well, I do not deny that there are such 

things as holy water, blessed candles, and 

scapulars, nor that the Church approves of 

them, and wishes us to use them. But that 

268 



Superstition. 



269 



Catholics think more of them than of the 
commandments of God, or trust in them more 
than in genuine piety and virtue, I do deny- 
altogether. 

Every Catholic that has any instruction at 
all from the Church knows that his salvation 
depends entirely on one thing ; that is, upon his 
spiritual state at the time of his death. He 
knows that if he has committed mortal sins, 
and dies without repenting of them, he will go 
to hell ; but that if he has repented of them 
and been forgiven, he will go to heaven, 
though he may have to go to purgatory first. 

At the same time he knows that certain 
means and helps for him to attain this end, 
to live well and to die well, have been estab- 
lished for him in the Church. First among 
these are the Sacraments instituted by Christ. 
But these are principally available for him 
when he is in the state of grace or the love 
of God; they are mostly helps for him to re- 
main or persevere in that state, not to get into 
it when he has lost it. Moreover, of these only 
one can be approached frequently or used habit- 
ually- that is the great Sacrament of the 
Eucharist. 

When he is in the state of sin — that is, when 
he has fallen into mortal sin, but has deter- 
mined to repent of sin and turn from it — he has, 
it is true, one Sacrament; the Sacrament of 



Superstition. 



Penance or confession. But how when he has 
not as yet the strength or courage to avail him- 
self of this ? Is he going to give up in despair 
or simply wait for God to change him ? 

You will say he can pray. Well, we say 
that too ; in fact, we say there is little chance 
for him unless he does; and that if he prays 
faithfully and constantly, he will certainly get 
grace to repent in earnest. But cannot any- 
thing else be done to help him in this ; to make 
it easier for him ; to remind him of it ? Cannot 
he be surrounded in some way with things that 
are holy, that will suggest holy thoughts to his 
mind? 

. The Church does not forget her children, 
even though they may be in the power of Satan 
for a time, and wandering off in the ways of 
sin. She is always going out into the desert, 
and trying to save the sheep that are lost. 
Hence she institutes certain means, something 
like the Sacraments, but which even the sinner, 
though still unrepentant, can use without fear 
of sacrilege, to make a bond between him and 
the grace which he has lost ; a clew by which 
he can find his way back from the wilderness to 
his true home. 

These means are what we call the sacra- 
mentals; just such things as you have been 
speaking of ; holy water, blessed candles, scap- 
ulars, and the like. Take the scapular, for 



Superstition. 



271 



instance. It reminds every Catholic of the 
Blessed Mother of God, who is also his mother, 
and has, as he feels, the love of a mother for 
him, even though he be a sinner, and on the 
way to ruin. It is to him like a locket with his 
own mother's hair in it, or some other keepsake 
that she has given him. Such a thing reminds 
the erring son of his mother's prayers for him, 
of the example which she gave him, and of the 
prayers which he himself once said as a child 
by her sidt. Is this superstition ? If not, how 
is it supe^tition for a Catholic to keep on a 
scapular, even if he feels he is not worthy of it ? 
The worst of it is that when he goes too far he 
does even give this up. 

I might ^peak similarly of the other things 
that have been mentioned. That even bad 
Catholics should have a devotion to them is not 
superstition, but a remnant of the faith and 
piety which they once had, and which they still 
hope to regain. All these things have their 
significance, and their association with what is 
good and holy ; and what else, till he repents, 
can the poor sinner have ? He does not think 
they will of themselves suffice ; that is a mis- 
take of yours. 5l 

However, these sacramentals have their other 
uses. They are not instituted simply for the 
purpose I Lave set forth. Good Catholics also 
use them; and, indeed, if they did not others 



272 



Superstition. 



would hardly do so, for it would be a confession 
or profession of sin in themselves. And they 
are believed to have a special efficacy ; that by 
being set apart and blessed by the Church for 
holy uses exclusively, they become specially 
helpful to all of us, as the Sacraments them- 
selves are, though in a less degree ; and that 
they become like everything else on which God 
has set, as it were, His seal — an object of dread 
to His enemies, the fallen angels. 

The regular use of objects then, or practices, 
like the sign of the cross, blessed or recom- 
mended by the Church, is not superstition. Su- 
perstition is properly the assigning of effects 
without a reasonable cause ; the adherence to, 
or avoidance of, certain practices in themselves 
senseless and unmeaning; or the endeavor to 
discover the future or accomplish some desired 
end by means evidently inadequate. To consult 
fortune-tellers is superstitious, if it is not even 
worse ; so it is to believe in dream$ ; or to refuse 
to sit down with thirteen at table. 

Now, of course I do not mean to say that no 
Catholics can be found who believe in things 
like these ; but I do say that these beliefs are 
not distinctively or specially Catholic. Also I 
can tell you that the influence of the Church is 
always and uniformly against these or any other 
superstitions. Of course she does not succeed 
in rooting them out of the minds or of the prac- 



Superstition. 



273 



tice of the faithful ; but she does succeed in 
making them understand that these things are 
always more or less sinful, and in some cases 
grievously so. All that listen to her voice know 
that they are matters to be repented of, to be 
confessed, and to be abandoned; and that is a 
great deal more than most other people under- 
stand. 

If you say, however, that Catholics are natu- 
rally more prone to believe such things than 
others of the same grade of education, because 
the habit of belief is so much more exercised 
and developed in them, I agree that it would 
seem as if such ought to be the case. But 
whether it be on account of the salutary in- 
structions which they receive on this point, or 
for some other reason, it does not appear that 
such is in fact the case. Still, even if it should 
at any time be proved by accurate statistics that 
our people are slightly more credulous than 
others, it does not seem to me a very serious 
charge. It is better to be slightly supersti- 
tious than not to accept what God has revealed ; 
it is better to believe a little too much than a 
great deal too little. 



CHAPTER XXIII. 



THE CHURCH OPPOSED TO SCIENCE. 

NOW we come to a charge which, if it were 
only true, would indeed be quite a serious 
matter. It is that the Catholic Church is op- 
posed to natural science ; that she has fought it 
all along tooth and nail, and only given up at 
one point or another where she was obliged to ; 
that she still objects to it and resists it as far as 
possible ; that she does not wish Catholics to 
become familiar with or to accept its teachings. 

Is any reason alleged why the Church should 
take this attitude ? Oh, yes ! our objectors say 
that the reason is plain. If Catholics were al- 
lowed to study science, they would see the 
errors of their creed ; they would see that what 
the Church teaches is contrary to the glorious 
discoveries of modern times, and they would 
give up their old benighted Church, and join in 
the march of thought. " And then how would 
the priests get their living ? ' ' some will go on 
to say ; 1 1 they live on the ignorance of the 
people, and cannot afford to let them learn what 
science teaches.* * 

Of course this last insinuation is an insult to 
us ; it implies that the whole business of the 
Catholic religion, in the minds of its priests, is 
274 



The Church opposed to Science. 



275 



to make money out of the people, not to make 
them better or to save their souls. But the 
first part, or the charge in general, is insulting 
as well. For what does it mean ? It means 
that we know our creed is false, and will not 
bear the light of scientific truth to be cast on it ; 
well, then, we are teaching and professing 
something which we know to be a lie. 

People should think well before they makt 
statements of this sort, even if they do make 
them in ignorance. Those who say these 
things generally are ignorant, for they do not 
know what the Church does teach ; but they 
ought to get out of their ignorance and know 
what they are talking about, and not indulge in 
flinging mud at random. 

Perhaps they will try to turn the tables on us 
and say: "Oh! we don't mean that exactly. 
We think you don't know exactly what science 
does teach; that you priests are somewhat in 
the dark yourselves, as you say we are. We 
don't doubt you are good men, but of course 
you are so occupied with your masses and 
prayers and ceremonies of one kind or another, 
that you are rather behind the times, and don't 
know all that science has lately discovered." 

But that will hardly do either ; for in that 
case, my scientific friends, why should we op- 
pose it, as you say we do ? If we really do op- 
pose it ; if we agree with you in saying there is 



276 The Church opposed to Science. 



a conflict or an issue between science and reli- 
gion, you have no reason to say we are igno- 
rant of science. If there was a disagreement ; 
if you maintained that science agreed with reli- 
gion, and we said it did not, then indeed you 
might say we were ignorant of science ; but the 
charge hardly works as things stand. 

What I have just given, however, as a sup- 
posed case, is the real case, if we reverse the 
parties in the discussion. The fact is, that we 
maintain that science does agree with religion, 
and you say it does not. By making the state- 
ment that there is a conflict between the two, 
you expose your own ignorance, not necessarily 
of science, but of the Catholic religion. 
v "What is that?" you will perhaps ask. 
1 1 Do you mean to say that the Catholic Church 
endorses evolution, allows that the human race 
may have been for millions of years on this 
planet, believes that what is called the soul of 
man is only a result of certain combinations of 
matter, etc.? Why, not long ago you your- 
self said something which would not square 
with this last conclusion.' * 

I do not deny that I did. But let us see 
what I said just now. I said that there was no 
conflict between science and religion ; but I do 
not mean by " science' ' all the crude or half- 
baked theories which scientific men may put 
forward. I do not blame them for putting them 



The Church opposed to Science. 277 

forward ; theories, or what are called working 
hypotheses, are necessary means for the ad- 
vancement of science. But no genuine scien- 
tific man claims that his hypotheses, put for- 
ward and intended to be used as a means of 
directing his own observations or experiments, 
and those of others, is the final truth. It is put 
up with the expectation that it will be to a 
great extent demolished, or even perhaps so 
battered out of shape that it will in the end be 
hardly recognizable. 

Such, for instance, was the idea and the con- 
duct of the immortal Isaac Newton, the per- 
fect model of a truly scientific man, in propos- 
ing the theory of gravitation. He had shown, 
by a rigorous mathematical demonstration, the 
most conclusive thing possible, that the laws of 
Kepler which had been reasonably well proved 
to explain with great accuracy the motions of 
some of the planets of our system, and probably 
those of the rest, could in their turn be ac- 
counted for by a force emanating from the sun 
according to the law of gravitation. It was also 
probable that other bodies beside the sun ex- 
ercised a similar force according to their masses. 
Some scientists, if they had had the good luck 
or the intellectual penetration to arrive at these 
conclusions, would have unhesitatingly an- 
nounced as an unquestionable fact what New- 
ton proposed as a hypotheses, that every parti- 



278 The Church opposed to Science. 

cle of matter attracted every other, according to 
the law of inverse squares which we call gravi* 
tation. But Newton was not sure, by any 
means. Because things did not seem to come 
out quite right in the case of the earth and 
moon, he concluded that the law of gravitation 
would not of itself suffice. The difficulty really 
was, that the size of the earth had not been cor- 
rectly measured ; but as this was an observed 
fact, and his idea was only a theory, Newton 
concluded that the fact was right and the 
theory at least partially wrong. But some 
would have taken just the opposite course ; they 
would have discredited the fact ; they would 
have said, 1 1 The fact does not agree with the 
theory; it must be a mistake.' ' 

If Newton had felt this sublime confidence in 
himself, if he had not been so modest, he might 
have proved his theory a little sooner ; he 
might have pushed forward the measurements 
which in the end proved him to be right. But 
he could afford to wait. He did not care about 
a personal success ; what he wanted was that 
the truth should be ascertained ; and that 
would come sooner or later. In the meantime 
he let his hypothesis stand, as a suggestion 
that might ultimately be of some service. But 
he expected that it would of itself be inade- 
quate to explam all the facts. 

Now, I do not mean to say by any means that 



The Church opposed to Science. 279 

there are few scientists of the present day that 
have Newton's disposition. Perhaps few carry- 
it quite so far ; and it may be better that they 
should not. But most of them have it sub- 
stantially. They, at least those of them who 
are real explorers in science, collect their facts 
laboriously, and test the theories, which to 
direct their work they are obliged to make, by 
mean? of them ; ready to drop or modify the 
theories as soon as the facts shall so indicate. 

Exceptions there may be and are to this 
among them. But the principal reason why so 
many things are generally believed in the pres- 
ent day to be discoveries or final conclusions of 
science which the real investigators and builders 
of science know are not so, is that there are a 
number of what may be called second-hand or 
second-rate men, who in lectures and popula 
books make statements of this kind. Thes^ 
men are in the foreground from the popular 
point of view ; they stand, as it were, at the 
door of the temple of science, within which its 
real votaries are hidden. These last are too 
busy, as a rule, to lecture or write popular 
books; and if they did, their language would be 
so technical that they would hardly be under- 
stood. It is these middle-men, so to speak, 
who announce one thing to-day, another to- 
morrow ; it is they who are mainly responsible 
for the apparent change and shifting of scien- 



280 The Church opposed to Science. 

tific results, which makes some people so dis* 
trustful of such results nowadays. 

And among these men, there is unfortunately 
quite a large class, specimens of which may be 
found even among the workers themselves, who 
have a prepossession or prejudice against reli- 
gion ; who seize on, and take special pains to 
announce, any scientific conclusions, whether 
final or provisional, which seem to them to be 
in conflict with Christianity. They dwell on 
these with great gusto and emphasis ; and take 
special care to let them soak well into the popu- 
lar mind. If these results are subsequently 
modified so as to agree better with the doctrines 
held, or which they understand to be held, by 
Christians — as, for example, in the case of the 
recent trend of scientific research as to the an- 
tiquity of the human race — this modification is 
unnoticed or lightly dwelt on by these popular 
exponents of science, who take all the while the 
attitude of advocates rather than of impartial 
judges. 

Well, then, as I have said, the Church has 
no quarrel with genuine science, with that 
which is legitimately directed by truly scien- 
tific methods to the attainment of truth. She 
cannot have such a quarrel ; for she believes in 
the truth of what she preaches, and she knows, 
what all having the use of reason must know, 
that truth cannot contradict truth* But she has 



The Church opposed to Science, 281 



a quarrel with those of whom I have spoken, 
who announce as certain truth what they ought 
to know well has not been proved to be so. 

Nor does she prohibit any Catholics who are 
competent to undertake scientific investigation 
from doing so. She places absolutely no ob- 
stacle in the way of their penetrating into all 
the facts of nature as it stands, or of their con- 
sidering the probable indications as to its past 
history, or of their weighing actual historical 
testimony. 

She does, indeed, caution them against being 
swept away from their moorings to the known 
truths of religion by the temporary appearances 
of a science as yet incomplete. She warns them 
also that in working on certain hypotheses they 
will be only losing their time. In this she acts 
as Science herself does. The would-be scientist 
who insists on re-examining conclusions now 
solidly established, like those of planetary as- 
tronomy, is simply looked on by those who are 
better informed with a s!irug or a smile. His 
talk is not noticed. 

Also she warns those weak in faith, or intel- 
lectually incompetent, against venturing on 
what to them personally might be dangerous 
ground. And she may also, at certain stages of 
scientific inquiry, prohibit the general and in- 
discriminate reading of scientific works in some 
particular department, on account of the prac- 



^82 The Church opposed to Science. 

tical impossibility of discernment at trie moment 
between the false and the true, the doubtful and 
the certain, the theory and the fact. Scientific 
men themselves, on purely scientific grounds, 
may often be of the same mind. It is well, 
sometimes, for those not competent to judge 
thoroughly of a subject, to abstain from med- 
dling with it ; it may do them more harm than 
good ; give them more false and confused ideas 
than true and clear ones. Sometimes ^he words 
of the poet are specially applicable : ' ' A little 
learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or 
taste not the Pierian spring.' r 

I have now gone over, as far as space admits, 
this matter of the so-called conflict between re- 
ligion and science. The difficulty has been 
much magnified by some of our scientific 
friends who want to force an issue. In point of 
fact, there are not by any means so many even 
apparent divergences between science and the 
Catholic religion as they, in their ignorance of 
the latter, suppose. Evolution, for instance, in. 
quite an extended sense, is not condemned by 
Catholic dogma ; when you assert that man 
was developed, soul as well as body, out of a 
monkey, that is quite another thing. Again, 
the Church is not committed to beliew that the 
universe, or even this planet, was m?de in six 
days of twenty-four hours ; nor that Adam lived 
just exactly so many years ago. V you say 



The Church opposed to Science. 283 



the world grew of itself, or that matter existed 
from all eternity, or that man has been here 
millions of years ; that again is something quite 
different. But you notice that these things 
which the Church cannot accept are nothing 
more than mere hypotheses or private opinions, 
not scientific results. 

Of course I cannot undertake here to explain 
the whole of Catholic dogma on the subjects 
which may also be discussed by natural science ; 
but I can tell you that no Catholic scientist 
well instructed in his religion finds anything 
in religion or science which tempts him to give 
up either. 

And there are great numbers of Catholic 
scientific men, and have been in all ages. 
Catholics have perhaps not emphasized or culti- 
vated natural science, in proportion to their 
numbers, so much as others ; they have more 
important matters to attend to. But they have 
by no means neglected it ; if you will look into 
the matter, you will find that the Church has 
furnished a great number of its brightest names. 

One word more to those who have a strong 
belief in many of the doctrines of Christianity, 
but differ from us ; to those who are commonly 
called orthodox Protestants. The scientific 
enemies of religion do not direct their attacks 
much against you, for they know that Protes- 
tantism, on account of its multiplicity and 



284 The Church opposed to Science. 



changeableness, cannot commit itself to any- 
thing ; but they know that if they could beat 
down or really disprove one tenet of the Catho- 
lic Church, the whole structure would go to 
pieces. But let me tell you that there is no 
danger of that; we are not at all alarmed. The 
progress of science may disquiet you and make 
you think Christianity is untenable ; that the 
head must abandon it, letting it take its refuge 
in the heart. But we are not disquieted ; we 
know that it has never interfered with any of 
the dogmas of our faith, and that it never will ; 
and if you were Catholics, you would know the 
same ; you would know that the Catholic reli- 
gion will always satisfy the requirements of the 
intellect, as well as the cravings and aspirations 
of the soul. 

There remains however, very probably, an 
Ejection in your minds which I will put in 
definite shape. It is that the Church, by its 
decrees and definitions, at any rate impedes the 
freedom of thought ; that ;hose who have no 
faith at all, or those who are at liberty to 
change their opinions at any time, can pursue 
scientific study under better conditions, to say 
the least, than we can, This point has already 
been lightly touched on in this chapter ; but as 
so much is often made of it, and in other matters 
beside those relating to science, it seems worth 
while to go into it somewhat more thoroughly. 



CHAPTER XXIV. 



THE CHURCH OPPOSED TO LIBERTY OP 
THOUGHT. 

THIS is a charge which is very frequently 
made against the Catholic Church ; more 
frequently, perhaps, and more uniformly, than 
any other ; and that even by those who, on the 
whole, are very well disposed to us. Such a 
friend will sometimes say : * * I certainly envy 
you Catholics the peace and rest of mind that 
you enjoy ; it must be a great blessing to have 
some one who can and will answer for you all 
these questions which so much disturb all 
thinking men ; I sometimes wish that I could 
do as you do, and take the word of old Mother 
Church for everything ; but I cannot make up 
my mind to abandon my reason and my liberty 
of thought, for these are greater, better, and 
nobler things than peace and rest would be. ,, 
Now, I do not want to use harsh terms, or 
speak contemptuously of any one ; but I must 
respectfully submit that this sort of talk, com- 
mon as it is, and uttered by sensible people too, 
is really little better than nonsense. And I 
think, if you will consider the matter patiently 

for a few moments, you will see that I am right. 

28 s 



286 Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 



The word liberty has, and rightly has, an at- 
tractive sound to all of us ; the idea of liberty 
is one which we all fondly cherish, especially 
in a republic like this in w T hich we have the 
good fortune to live ; it is an idea which we are 
ready to fight for and to die for. 

But let us look at it more closely, and see 
wh} 7 we value liberty, and object to its being 
restrained. It is because we look on such re- 
* straints as preventing us from acting as reason 
would dictate, or at least as seems to us best. 
When w T e see clearly that a thing is in every 
way injurious to us, we do not chafe at being 
prevented from doing it as we otherwise might, 
through ignorance or inattention. To take a 
plain example : a street is impassable for a 
time on account of some excavations which are 
being made ; the city puts up a barrier at each 
end of the part under repair, placing a pl^sical 
obstacle to our going through. We drive up to 
the place in our carriage, and have to turn back 
and go some other way. Do we complain ? do 
we w T ant to have liberty to drive up to the 
edge of the hole, and perhaps, if it be dark or 
the horse at all skittish, fall into it ? Well, 
hardly. 

I think that will do for the matter of liberty 
of action. Let us now look at that of liberty of 
thought, which is our special subject just now. 
And let us take an example here also. 



Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 287 



You know, I suppose, that we never see but 
one side of the moon. There it is month after 
month, year after year, with the same old fa- 
miliar markings. If you don't know this, 
watch it carefully, and you will see that it 
is so. 

Now, of course the moon has got another 
side; and we can't help speculating to some 
extent as to how that other side would look, 
though it really is not of much use to do so, for 
we have no data to go upon. Still, it is con- 
ceivable that some such data might at some 
time be obtained, enough to form some sort of 
opinion on ; and, if they were, it would surely 
be very unjust to forbid us from forming such 
an opinion 

But now r suppose that a way is discovered of 
actually seeing the other side, like the theoreti- 
cally possible one given in Jules Verne's trip to 
the moon, by shooting a projectile round it from 
the earth, with people in the projectile. Proba- 
bly we w 7 ould not all care to make such a 
trip ; but suppose that quite a number of repu- 
table citizens had made it, and that some had 
even taken kodaks with them ; and that their 
accounts and the photographs which they had 
taken all agreed. 

Don't you see now that our mental position 
with regard to the matter has changed ? Spec 
ulation can no longer be of advantage to us; 



z 88 Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 



and we could rightly be forbidden, on the 
ground of waste of time, to speculate on a 
matter w r hich is no longer one of opinion, but 
of ascertained fact. It has become a thing 
which we cannot rationally do or desire ; nay, 
it has become even impossible for us to seri- 
ously speculate on the subject, or have opinions 
at all. We are forced, by the very laws of 
rational nature, to accept the credible and cer- 
tain testimony that we have, and stop speculat- 
ing. Our liberty of thought on this matter has 
gone. 

Now, this is only a supposed case; but there 
are plenty of actual ones in our life all the time. 
A few years ago it was quite lawful to specu- 
late as to the sources of the Congo River in 
Africa ; but now that Stanley, and after him 
quite a number of others have visited them, we 
have lost our liberty of thought on this sub- 
ject. 

In fact, every step of the increase of knowl- 
edge, of which in these latter days we are so 
justly proud, is a blow at liberty of thought, 
and a circumscription of it, or a restraint put on 
it. If we have common sense, we cannot now 
speculate vaguely as to the distance of the sun 
from the earth, or the ratio of the circumference 
of a circle to its diameter ; for w r e know that 
distance with considerable, and that ratio with 
almost inconceivable, accuracy. These are just 



Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 289 



two examples out of thousands which might be 
given. 

Now one point more. Some things that we 
know, and cannot speculate about, we know by 
our own senses and personal investigations ; but 
a great many, like those which I have just men- 
tioned, few know in this way. How, then, do 
we know them ? By the concurrent testimony 
of competent witnesses or judges. This has 
created in us a certainty so absolute that, 
struggle as we may, we cannot, if we are 
sensible men, get away from it. Contrary ideas 
may, of course, occur, or we may bring them up 
voluntarily to our minds; but we cannot suc- 
ceed in giving any real assent to them, or seri- 
ously ejitertaining them as opinions. The lib- 
erty of thought which our , forefathers had on 
these matters is lost to us. 

But you say that the surrender of our reason 
to reason itself, so to speak, which we make in 
the instances I have named, and no doubt in 
many others, is a very different thing from giv- 
ing it up at the command of the Church. I 
answer, by no means. This is just where, from 
lack of thought and knowledge on the subject, 
you make your mistake. 

Our assent to the teachings of the Church is 
really an act similar to the assent which both 
you and we make to Stanley's discoveries in 
Central Africa. Your mistake about it arises 



igo Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 



from your not understanding what faith is. 
You have been so long without it, so long ac- 
customed in religious matters to give the name 
of faith to speculation or opinion, that you 
really have forgotten the meaning of the word. 

Faith- really is an assent to testimony ; and it 
is a rational or common sense act when the 
testimony is credible and unimpeachable. It is 
Vsry specially and peculiarly so when the testi- 
mony is that of Almighty God. 

Now, our belief in the dogmas of the Church 
is an act just of this character. It is not a 
blind submission or obedience to a command, 
but an assent to a revelation or a statement of 
face made to us by none less than God Himself. 
He informs us on subjects wdiich are beyond 
the reach of our senses or any of our natural 
faculties ; be} r ond the reach of all of us, just as 
many facts of nature or conclusions of mathe- 
matics, like those which I have mentioned, are 
beyond the reach of most men. 

"Well," you may rejoin, ''but how do you 
know 7 that it is God who informs you about 
these matters? " I answer, simply by what we 
call the evidences of religion. Really very 
much in the same w 7 ay as you would assure 
yourself that your informant on. astronomical, 
mathematical, or geographical matters was in 
face the authority on these subjects that he 
claused to be. In the case of religion, setting 



Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 291 



aside the direct action of God on the soul in a 
supernatural way, which raises our act to a su- 
pernatural plane, the proof is, in the first place, 
principally by the miracles or signs by which 
He accompanies His statement. Thus Nicode- 
mus said to our L,ord : " Rabbi, we know that 
thou art a teacher from God ; for no man can do 
these signs which thou dost, unless God be with 
Him." The miracles of our Lord Himself, of 
His apostles, and of their followers, continued 
in the Church, as has been said and is plain to 
all who will study the evidence, down to the 
present day, are sufficient in themselves to show 
us in whose name the Church speaks ; for they 
are not only wonders, but wonders which bear, 
on examination, the stamp of God upon them. 

We could now, however, almost dispense 
with these proofs of religion. The very im- 
possibility in itself of a merely human institu- 
tion teaching for nearly two thousand years the 
same doctrine ; not merely repeating a form of 
words, but teaching a living system of belief 
regarding matters unascertainable by reason ; 
answering questions regarding it, often quite 
complicated and abstruse, and yet never be- 
trayed, in spite of the personal ignorance of 
history or theology among its teaching body 
which has largely existed at various periods 
and more or less at all times, into a single con- 
tradiction or inconsistency, is in itself a suffix 



2g2 Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 



cient proof that a superhuman wisdom is guid- 
ing and directing it. 

Again, the survival of the mere organization 
of the Church, and the very fact of the obedi- 
ence, assent, and harmony existing within it, 
though unaided by material force, in contrast to 
the insubordination, doubt, and discord which 
have come into Christian bodies separated from 
it, are in themselves a strong proof to many. 

Well, now, SB.y y if you please, that our evi- 
dence is not as good as we think ; the fact re- 
mains that we believe because we are con- 
vinced, not on account of any external pressure. 
But now, perhaps, you resume : " This may be 
all very well for the learned and intelligent ; but 
how are these considerations which you have 
named an argument for the common people who 
have not much reasoning ability ? " I think 
J'ou may possibly make this objection ; but still 
if you do, I am a little surprised. For I under- 
stood that you were one of the persons who had 
reasoning ability, and that your objection was 
in the beginning that you did not want to 
abandon it. I thought it only applied to think- 
ing men. If one has not got much use of rea- 
son, certainly it is not a tyranny that he should 
be taught by others who have. No one says 
that it "is subjecting a child to a mental slavery 
when we teach him his alphabet ; the child, no 
doubt, may complain that his liberty is re- 



Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 293 



stricted by the process, but it is not his liberty 
of thought that worries him. He may say that 
he wants to play, but he does not say : " Never 
mind about teaching me ; I can find out all this 
by myself" ; or if perchance he does say it, he 
does not know what he is talking about. 

In the same way, then, as we teach a child 
the alphabet we teach him religion ; just as you 
teach him geography, because you know it is 
true. But we do not want to keep him down to 
an abject belief in us as his instructors. We 
want him, we want all Catholics, so far as in 
them lies — and all other people too, for the mat- 
ter of that — to study these evidences of religion. 
That is precisely what our Christian schools are 
for ; to make all our people believe in their re- 
ligion intelligently, instead of taking it for 
granted. We want that any restrictions there 
are on their liberty of thought should be such 
as they themselves see are necessary for a rea- 
sonable being. 

We do not, of course, want that their heads 
should be stuffed full of statements which we 
know are false, or that doubts which they have 
not the means of settling should be put into 
their minds as to what we know is true. But 
in this we act just as you do about secular 
knowledge. You do not want false or inaccu- 
rate text-books ; you do not put two histories, 
one correct, the other full of errors, before 



294 Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 



students, for them to take whichever they 
choose. C 

In short, there is nothing in our action in tnis 
whole matter different from yours, except what 
comes from the fact that in religion we are sure 
about the truth, while you are doubtful. If 
Bible Christians agreed about the sense of the 
Bible as we do about the Catholic faith ; if their 
Word of God was really a practical and avail- 
able Word of God to them, clearly settled and 
demonstrated, as ours is to us, they would con- 
sider liberty of thought about it a mistake, and 
a dangerous one, as it is, more or less according 
to the importance of the subject, about all 
things which are really known and definitely 
ascertained. On such matters there is no 
advantage in surmising or guessing; one is 
much better off to know the truth at once. 
And we Catholics know and admit this obvious 
piece of common sense ; and the more intelli- 
gent a Catholic may be, the more clearly he 
sees it. 

Therefore, do not fancy that Catholics are 
chafing and fretting secretly over their inability 
to indulge in religious speculations. There is, 
in fact, no occasion for them to do so, if they are 
fond of this sort of mental occupation ; for there 
are a vast number of points on which they are 
quite free to form opinions ; which are not set- 
tled by the Church, and which in all proba- 



Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 295 

bility form no part of the faith, and therefore 
never will be so settled. The number of such 
points is probably practically greater for us 
than it is for you. The fixing of the funda- 
mental principles, or indeed the determination 
of any of the laws of any science, always opens 
up a number of questions which otherwise 
would not be thought of ; and what is true of 
sciences in general is true of theology in par- 
ticular. If one is always worrying about first 
principles, which necessarily are comparatively 
few, one never gets any further, and has his 
menta l range much restricted. 

Neither should you imagine, as is plain from 
what has been said, that Catholics have to be 
ilways struggling to stifle their doubts about 
those matters which do not belong to faith, and 
have been definitely settled. They do not have 
to do so, any more than you have to about the 
matter of some science with which you may be 
somewhat imperfectly acquainted. They know 
that they can study up the matter of religion in 
correct and profound treatises, if they like, just 
as matters of science can be studied. But they 
feel quite confident of their faith without doing 
so, just as you do, though you may not be a 
man of science, about the determined laws of 
astronomy or chemistry. And they feel no 
more need to study the works of Protestants 
or infidels to obtain information about religion 



296 Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 



than you do to read the pamphlet of some 
would-be astronomer who thinks he has 
smashed gravitation to pieces, and refuted 
Newton or Laplace ; non-Catholic speculations 
about religion are to an intelligent Catholic 
simply unscientific trash. 

That is to say, they feel and act in this way 
unless they have some private reason for hoping 
that the faith might not be true. They know, 
of course, that it is a restraint, not on their in- 
tellect but on their passions; for any religion 
coming from God must necessarily be this. 
And this restraint, indeed, may cause some 
chafing and fretting. It is our unvarying ex- 
perience that Catholics do not look out for argu- 
ments against their religion unless they wish to 
escape from its control in this respect ; or, what 
comes to the same thing, unless they want to 
enjoy some temporal good which cannot be 
gained without renouncing their faith. Of 
course I can hardly expect you to believe that 
I am right in this ; but it is true, all the same. 
It is not merely a conclusion of theory ; it is a 
result of observation. 

It may be noticed that the charges discussed 
in these two chapters are, strangely enough, 
directly opposed to each other. The charge 
that the Church is opposed to science is really 
that she is opposed to that which itself prevents 
liberty of thought by giving us certain informa- 



Church opposed to Liberty of Thought. 297 



tier*. It may be said, however, that she desires 
liberty of thought on some matters, but forbids 
it on others. This is true, but not in the sense 
in which it is intended. She forbids, as against 
reason, common sense, and the welfare of man, 
liberty of thought on matters, whether in the 
material or spiritual order, which have been 
clearly demonstrated and definitely ascertained ; 
she refuses to abandon it on those which are 
still open to reasonable question, as is the case 
with certain scientific hypotheses not as yet 
proved. You may disagree with her in your 
judgment of what is certain and what is doubt- 
ful ; but except for this, there is no difference 
between her action and your own. 



CHAPTER XXV. 



THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OPPOSED TO FREE 
INSTITUTIONS. 

IT is a charge very commonly made against 
the Church, that she is opposed to free in- 
stitutions. This charge, the truth of which is 
usually simply taken for granted, is one which 
naturally prejudices Americans more against 
her than any other which could be made. For 
Americans, as a rule, are most profoundly at- 
tached to the free institutions under which they 
live, and most absolutely convinced that de- 
mocracy is better than monarchy or aristocracy 
in any form. 

Now, I say the truth of this most injurious 
charge against the Church is usually simply 
taken for granted. But surely such a proceed- 
ing is far from being fair. I should like to 
have a reason given for it ; and shall try, there- 
fore, to find out what reasons there are likely 
to be. 

The most obvious one seems to be that the 
government of the Church is itself monarch- 
ical. This statement is true, in a certain 
sense, no doubt. The Pope is unquestion- 
ably the supreme authority in matters of 

298 



The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 299 

faith and morals ; that is, his consent is neces- 
sary and sufficient to establish the truth in con- 
troverted questions on these subjects. This 
authority is, however, rarely exercised ; and 
when it is, it is usually merely to place beyond 
controversy a point already very nearly settled 
by the popular voice. So that here, after all 
we very rarely have any strain put on oui 
minds by obedience to his infallible decision 
„ Then again, it is true that in matters of dis- 
cipline the Pope is the supreme legislator. He 
has absolute control over all inferior legislators 
in the Church ; he can reform or abrogate laws 
made by bishops in their dioceses, if it seems to 
him expedient to do so ; and he can make laws 
for the universal Church which are binding 
without the consent of his inferiors. But here 
again, such action on his part is very rare. 
Outside of the matter of the rubrics — that is, of 
the prayers or ceremonies of public worship — . 
legislation of this kind is unusual, as is also 
interference with the action of his subordinates. 
The fact is, that both their action and his are 
usually simply in accordance with fixed tra- 
ditional principles, modified more or less ac- 
cording to the circumstances of particular 
times or places ; with which those living on the 
spot are generally supposed to be best ac- 
quainted. 

In point of fact, then, Rome legislates very 



300 The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 



little, for the very simple reason that there is 
very little need that she should do so. The 
work of the Church proceeds on its regular lines 
throughout the world mainly by means of the 
zeal and energy of the clergy, and of the laity 
co-operating with them ; and it is seldom that 
this needs to be specially directed or controlled. 
The idea, so common among Protestants, that 
everything done by Catholics is done by virtue 
of secret orders from Rome, is simply ludicrous 
to those at all acquainted with the actual state 
of things. In reality, Rome seldom initiates ; 
as a rule she merely sanctions or allows ; some- 
times she checks or restrains, or perhaps for- 
bids. For example, take the case of the found- 
ing of a new religious order or community, by 
which we mean such as the Jesuits, Dominicans, 
or Franciscans, or numbers of others less nota- 
ble or conspicuous. The first idea of an order 
like this is formed by some priest or even lay- 
man, having no special authority in the Church ; 
he associates with himself some friends and 
sympathizers, and they form a little society, 
with the permission, probably, of the bishop of 
the diocese. After some years, especially if the 
society has grown and been established in 
various dioceses, the approval of Rome may be 
asked ; but it takes some time to obtain it. 
Meanwhile the association or order goes on do- 
ing the work for which it was established, very 



The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 30* 

much as it would if there were no Pope at all to 
jay anything about it. The definite Papal ap- 
proval is, of course, a great thing for it ; but 
its real success or failure depends principally on 
the zeal and virtue of its members ; Rome 
simply waits to see if it has the elements of life 
and strength in it ; it does not undertake to 
give these to it, or to establish by its decrees 
what would not otherwise exist. 

What is true of great matters is also true of 
lesser ones. Any one familiar with the practi- 
cal working of the Church knows that it is very 
far from being in practice a strong centralized 
government, the pressure of which is felt con- 
tinually throughout its dominions ; still farther 
from being a military organization, every part 
of which acts by orders from headquarters. 

Of course I know it will be hard for many to 
believe this ; and it is, of course, impossible to 
prove the truth of what I say about a matter of 
this kind to those who are not willing to believe 
it. It is, indeed, only by being a Catholic that 
one can fully understand and realize these 
things. I must content myself with simply 
stating facts. 

If you ask why the government of the 
Church should be monarchical, the answer 
seems evident enough. It is plain, in the first 
place, with regard to matters of faith, that the 
amount of supernatural assistance required is 



30£ The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 

much less on this system than on any other 
which could be devised; and secondly, with 
regard to matters of discipline, as the general 
government is mainly occupied, not with mak- 
ing general laws, but with the decision of par- 
ticular questions, a representative government 
would be intolerably cumbrous and incon- 
venient. It would be much the same as if for 
the business of the Supreme Court it were 
necessary to hold a convention of all the 
lawyers in the country. When any important 
changes are to be made in the general laws of 
the Church, it is customary to convoke a gen- 
eral council ; but this seldom needs to be done. 

So much, then, for the monarchical constitu- 
tion of the Church itself. But another argu- 
ment is often made to show that the Church 
sympathizes with monarchy in general, and i? 
opposed to free institutions ; namely, that thf 
Church has been generally allied with men 
archies in actual history. 

This is again true as a statement of fact ; but 
when we come to look at it, it really has no 
significance. For it simply comes from two 
causes, neither of which can justly be a ground 
of complaint against the Church. The first is 
that the Church has always been a supporter of 
legitimate government, and opposed to anarchy; 
the Church, from the days of our L,ord Himself 
who said, 1 ' Render unto Caesar the things 



The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 303 

which are Caesar's," has always upheld and 
sanctioned the authority of the State. The 
second is that most governments have been 
monarchical; so that in supporting govern- 
ment, it has usually supported monarchy neces- 
sarily. But the Church has always recognized 
and supported popular governments where they 
existed. It has supported monarchy as a rule, 
simply because, as a rule, there was nothing 
else to support. 

Where the reigning family has in any partic- 
ular country been strongly Catholic, the Church 
has no doubt at some times preferred to trust to 
it than to venture the experiment of republican- 
ism, particularly where the republic was found- 
ed, like the first one in France, on princi- 
ples opposed to religion ; and it is quite natural 
that individual Catholics should generally have 
taken the same view of the case. And, un- 
doubtedly, the Church has sometimes suffered 
and brought itself into a subjection injurious to 
its own freedom by putting its trust too much in 
princes, allowing them, in return for their pro- 
tection, too much interference in ecclesiastical 
affairs. But all this has been from no prefer- 
ence for monarchy in itself. 

The Church undoubtedly prefers that a na- 
tion should be Catholic rather than Protestant 
or infidel ; she also prefers that its government 
should be Catholic; that is, that it should 



304 The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 



legislate in accordance with the principles of 
Catholic morality, which, rightly understood, 
commend themselves to the common sense of 
mankind. She also desires that the Catholic 
religion should be allowed its free exercise. 
But though she evidently cannot regard it as 
beneficial that error should also be allowed free 
course, experience has shown that invoking the 
arm of the State to repress it, except where it 
is evidently contrary to the peace and the 
temporal welfare of the State itself, is likely 
to do more harm than good, both by making 
religion itself odious, and also, as has been 
said, by putting religion itself in a subjection 
to the temporal authority in return for the pro- 
tection and aid afforded by the latter. 

She is, therefore, thoroughly in favor of a 
government like that under which we have the 
good fortune to live ; a government which con- 
fines itself to its own proper business of provid- 
ing for those things which cor^cern the temporal 
welfare of its citizens. She does not regard it, 
of course, as being the best possible govern- 
ment in its actual legislation, any more than 
she regards its citizens, the authors of that 
legislation, as the best or wisest men possible ; 
she cannot but see that it makes mistakes, 
and labors under false impressions, particularly 
with regard to herself, her own aims and in- 
tentions. She also knows that true belief in 



The Church opposed to Free Institutions. 305 



matters of doctrine has a more intimate con 
nection with right principles of public and 
private life than_ is generally supposed ; and 
that, for want of thorough Christian knowledge 
and instruction, the temporal welfare and 
happiness of the people is not so effectually 
secured as it might be. But she does not wish 
to secure for the American people the advan- 
tages of the truth which she possesses by force , 
trickery, or conspiracy ; but only by the legiti- 
mate means which American citizenship places 
in the hands of all. She regards these means 
and this citizenship as the best hope which any 
country can have for its future. 

Catholics desire the conversion of this coun- 
try to the Catholic faith ; that is a matter of 
course. So Methodists, Baptists, or Presby- 
terians must necessarily desire its conversion 
to their own respective ways of thinking. No 
charge should, therefore, be made against us on 
this head. But should we be successful in this, 
we do not desire to tyrannize over those who 
may still differ from uc. We do not wish to 
change our form of government, or to establish 
the Catholic religion, making nonconformity 
with it an offence. But no one could rightly 
blame a Catholic majority for making laws by 
which, for instance, the proper respect for the 
Divine institution of marriage should be more 
fully secured. If infidels are not considered 



306 The Church opposed to Free Institutions. ; 

disloyal to our free institutions for trying to 
break this down, how can Catholics be so con- 
sidered for endeavoring to build it up ? Or if a 
Catholic majority should believe that some 
special measures needed to be taken for sup- 
pressing the evils of intemperance, and should 
vote such measures, as Catholics would do now 
if the}' followed the direction of their pastors, 
could such a proceeding be considered as 
bigoted, intolerant, or contrary to the principles 
of American liberty ? 

I know :hat many, perhaps most non-Catho- 
lics, will say : " This all sounds well enough ; 
but organizations, as well as individuals, must 
be judged, not by their professions, but by 
their actions. History shows that Catholics 
have always persecuted those opposed to them, 
and persecuted them simply as such, whenever 
it was in their power to do so. And what they 
have done we believe they will do again/ ' 

This charge is a very common and a very 
weighty one in the minds of most Protestants, 
It deserves a special examination. 



CHAPTER XXVI, 



PERSECUTION, 

PERSECUTION is considered by the aver- 
age Protestant as something specially 
characteristic of the Catholic Church. He con- 
siders it so obvious that the Catholic Church 
always persecutes heretics when she gets a 
chance, that it is hardly worth while to make 
any attempt to prove it. But if proof is called 
for, surely "Bloody Mary " and the Spanish 
Inquisition are quite sufficient to settle the 
question. 

But in fact the question is one which cannot 
be settled in any such summary manner. Be« 
fore w r e can arrive at any sound conclusions, or 
even think or talk reasonably on the subject, 
we must understand just what is meant by per- 
secution, and how far or in what cases we can 
reasonably object to it. 

No one, I presume, objects to the persecution 
of burglars or murderers except those who are,, 
or are likely to be, the objects of such perse- 
cution. Society has well- formed and settled 
views, not only as to the immorality of burglary 
and murder, but also as to their inconsistency 
with the peace and welfare of the state. As a 

W7 



308 



rule, it contents itself with the persecution or 
punishment of the overt act, and it accom- 
plishes its end sufficiently well by so doing ; for 
burglars or assassins are not inclined to make 
profession openly of their purposes, or to incite 
others publicly to imitate their example. 

But even in this may we not have, in a certain 
sense, persecution for opinion's sake? Sup- 
pose that a man holds that, according to his re- 
ligion or conscience, the sacrifice of human life 
is necessary. That such doctrines are held as 
religious creeds by considerable numbers of 
men, is well known. Would not a civilized 
government acquiring control of a country 
where such views were held be obliged to put 
them down by the strong hand — to persecute 
and severely punish those who should act out 
their convictions in this respect ? And yet the 
victim of such persecution might truly allege 
that, according to his creed, the taking of life in 
the case in which he was punished for it was a 
matter of the highest obliga' '.on, most necessary 
not only for his own salvation but for that also 
of the one whose life he had taken. 

It cannot be said that holding such doctrines 
is a mark of insanity, and that insane persons 
form an exception to ordinary rules ; for one 
cannot believe whole nations to be insane. 

But we will take a more practical case ; one 
nearer home. Surely there are plenty of peo- 



Persecution. 309 

pie, not considered insane, who hold that a man, 
at least if no one is depending on him for sup- 
port, has a right to take his own life. It is 
hard to prove that this conviction is unreason- 
able, or that this view is a mistaken one, unless 
by the aid of religion ; and if the would-be 
suicide does not admit the teachings of your 
religion, it is practically impossible to persuade 
him of his error, which may amount to a reli- 
gious conviction with him. Nevertheless, laws 
have been passed, and now exist, making at- 
tempted suicide a punishable offence ; and we 
do not find that such laws are considered to 
savor of intolerance or persecution. And yet 
clearly by them we punish men for acting out 
their conscientious convictions, or what may 
be presumed to be such ; as in the case of the 
Mormons. 

But you say, " What we mean by persecution 
is persecution, not for action's but for opinion's 
sake. As you have said, the civilized state 
contents itself with punishing the overt act." 

Had you not better wait a minute, and see if 
you are not going too far in this definition of 
persecution which you have given? For my 
part, I do not see very well how any one can be 
persecuted merely for an opinion, unless we 
bring a mind-reader as witness against him. 
What is meant by the loose phrase ' ' persecu- 
tion for opinion's sake," means really persecu- 



Persecution* 



tion for giving utterance to an opinion ; for 
that is the only thing which testimony is com- 
petent to prove. An opinion which remains 
locked up in a man's breast, unbetrayed by 
word or sign, never was persecuted, because it 
cannot be. It is only the manifestation of 
opinion which can be punished ; though this 
manifestation may be negative, as we may say, 
or simply recusancy ; an omission of certain 
acts or certain formulas which would be cheer- 
fully performed or subscribed by those holding 
the opinions legally recognized as correct. 

But, in point of fact, most of the religious 
persecution which has been instituted, at least 
by Catholic states, has been for the open utter- 
ance of heretical opinions, generally accom- 
panied by the endeavor to persuade others also 
to embrace them. Those who have made no 
attempt to propagate their opinions have gen- 
erally been unmolested. 

Now, are we prepared to say that free utter- 
ance and propagation of opinions which the 
people in general, and the authorities which as 
a rule represent their views, consider as 'dan- 
gerous to the general welfare, should always be 
allowed? We have, I know, tried to maintain 
the right of free speech and a free press ; still 
we have always drawn the line at the publica- 
tion of evidently indecent and immoral litera- 
ture, and should undoubtedly draw it, had we 



Persecution. 



311 



occasion, at the public giving out of matter of 
this kind by word of mouth. I am inclined to 
think, also, that it is only because infidelity has 
lately become quite common, that public bias- 
phemy against all that Christians hold sacred is 
tolerated among us. Even now it is not in all 
parts of the country ; and when it is not, this is 
not stigmatized as persecution. 

Furthermore, we are lately beginning to see 
that some stop must be put to the open publi- 
cation of opinions which are essentially sub- 
versive of all social order and peace. A man 
may hold in his own mind the idea that "prop- 
erty is theft,' * that the private ownership of 
anything is an outrage on humanity ; that can- 
not be helped or punished. But if he under- 
takes to ventilate this doctrine on a public plat- 
form, especially if his doing so is equivalent to 
a positive incitement to his hearers to steal or 
destroy the goods of others, the state has as 
much right to interfere with his action as if he 
personally undertook such stealing or destruc- 
tion. Or a man may entertain the opinion that 
all government is intolerable, that every one 
must be free to do exactly what he pleases; 
that we cannot interfere with. But if he col- 
lects a body of hearers about him, and en- 
deavors to form them into a mob for resistance 
to lawful authority, there is no reason why his 
freedom of speech should not be as much m 



312 



Persecution. 



strained as his freedom of action would be 
should he begin to act on his own part in de- 
fiance of the law of the land. 

I think, then, it can hardly be denied that it 
is in the competency of the state to prevent and 
to punish the open expression of dangerous 
opinions. If that is conceded, we have the 
whole essential idea of persecution as one that 
cannot be condemned as unreasonable or cruel. 
Every state must for its own preservation 
sometimes persecute, not for the mere holding 
of an opinion, but for its open expression. , 

We are therefore obliged to confess that if we 
condemn persecution for the sake of religion — 
that is to say, the punishment of the open ex- 
pression and propagation of religious opinions, 
it must be either because such opinions cannot 
be considered as dangerous to the welfare of 
society, or because the punishment will be in- 
effectual, only increasing the evil it is intended 
to remove, or because it is of an excessive or 
barbarous character, going farther than is nec- 
essary to accomplish the result which is re- 
quired. 

It is really for the first of these reasons main- 
ly that persecution is now generally held to be 
unjustifiable. This, then, I shall principally 
examine, as follows: 

An opinion cannot, of course, be con- 
iMered dangerous to the social welfare if it 



Persecution. 



is considered by the community in general as 
being quite probably true, or if it is one which 
has no perceptible connection with the moral 
character or the material prosperity of man. 
On the first of these grounds ordinary political 
theories cannot be considered fit matters for 
legal repression ; on the second, most of the 
speculations which might be put forward in ab- 
stract physical science, however absurd they 
may evidently be, must, of course, be indul- 
gently tolerated. 

It is on both these grounds that the persecu- 
tion of religious opinions is now generally 
reprobated. The double notion is now gen- 
erally abroad, first, that truth in matters of 
religion, even perhaps with regard to the very 
existence of God Himself, is unattainable, so 
that any view which a man holds about them 
is merely a speculation ; and, secondly, that 
religious opinions, properly so called, have no 
connection with morality or the well-ordered 
life of the social body. 

On these premises, of course, it is therefore 
perfectly reasonable that persecution should be 
reprobated. But the difficulty is that the pre- 
mises themselves cannot be considered as well 
taken. The first begs the question as to the 
existence of certain evidence for religious 
truth The second is utterly absurd, as has 
been previously shown. A single . instance 



3H 



Persecution. 



will show its absurdity. A man may believe 
in a God who sanctions and commands what 
the common sense of mankind regards as a 
crime. His belief is a religious opinion ; but 
it is one like in every respect to those before 
instanced, of absolute communism and anar- 
chy, to which the state cannot be indifferent. 

Now, let us see what the application of this 
is to the persecutions which Catholic states 
have instituted. The circumstances, as a rule, 
have been that a body of men, or individuals 
here and there, have openly proclaimed and en- 
deavored to propagate opinions which, rightly 
or wrongly, were held, not only by the gov- 
ernment of the state, but also by the great 
mass of the people, as being the denial of 
truths most necessary to the holy life of the 
individual, and by means of that to the sta- 
bility, peace, and prosperity of the state. 
Catholics know, for example, perfectly well 
that if the people of a Catholic nation were 
persuaded of the truth of the Protestant doc- 
trine as originally enunciated, to the effect that 
no sins would be imputed to one who had faith 
in Christ, the door would be at once opened to 
vice and disorder of every kind, as Luther and 
others of the original Reformers sorrowfully 
confess it was. " The world," says Luther in 
his Table Talk, 1 ' grows worse and worse, and 
becomes more wicked every day. Men arr now 



Persecution 



315 



more given to revenge,^ more avaricious, more 
devoid of mercy, less modest, and more incor- 
rigible; in fine, more wicked than in the Pa- 
pacy.' ' And in another place: "One thing 
no less astonishing than scandalous is, to see 
that since the pure doctrine of the gospel has 
been brought to light, the world daily goes 
from bad to worse.' ■ Bucer confesses that 
"the greater part of the people seem to have 
embraced the gospel only to shake off the 
yoke of discipline, and the obligation of fast- 
ing, penances, etc., which lay upon them in the 
time of popery, and to live at their pleasure, 
enjoying their lust and lawless appetite without 
control." Calvin says: "The pastors, yes, 
the pastors themselves who mount the pulpit 
. . . are at the present time the most 
shameful examples of waywardness and other 
vices." 

I do not mean to say that these disorders 
everywhere visibly mark out Protestant nations 
from Catholic ones; they do not, and for two 
reasons. First, Catholics, as a rule, hardly live 
up to their faith, or, as we say, do not fully 
practise their religion ; secondly, common sense, 
natural virtue, and the grace of God as well, 
have done much to correct the original Protest- 
ant doctrine, and to repair the wreck which it 
made. But the principle holds good that a 
religious doctrine may necessarily and obvi- 



Persecution. 



ously lead to results not only immoral, but 
such as shake the whole framework of society. 

In some cases its effect may be immediate, 
being directly aimed at the social order itself. 
Such, for instance, is one of the propositions of 
Wickliffe to the effect that no man can have 
legitimate authority, either in the State or the 
Church, while he is in the state of mortal sin. 
This, of course, practically exempts every one 
from obedience to any superior, secular or reli- 
gious, whose character he does not approve, 
and destroys the whole constitution of society 
at one blow. And yet it is a religious proposi- 
tion; for it evidently means to recognize au- 
thority as coming from God, and to deny it to 
those who are not in His favor. 

Now, can any one say that a Catholic state, 
or any state whatever for the matter of that, 
can calmly tolerate the dissemination of propo- 
sitions of this kind ? If it cannot, the persecu- 
tions of history are not without some just war- 
rant. 

To all this it must be added that it was not 
always simply the expression or propagation of 
opinion which has provoked persecution from 
Catholic states. Lawless acts of outrage and 
insult to what was most reverenced by the mass 
of the people were sometimes committed. Even 
now and in this country we have laws prohibit- 
ing and punishing the disturbance of religious 



Persecution. 



3*7 



worship ; why, then, should our ancestors not 
punish those who were guilty of this and much 
more? 

We picture to ourselves those cruel Papists 
seizing and burning at the stake a man who 
was simply worshipping God in peace and pri- 
vacy according to the dictates of his con- 
science ; but really this was not the usual 
case. 

I do not say it has never occurred ; nor, what 
comes to about the same thing, that actual con- 
formity has not been required to a religion in 
which one did not believe. But if these things 
have been notably exemplified anywhere, they 
were in the Protestant persecutions under Eliza- 
beth and her successors, where Catholics were 
subjected to heavy penalties and placed under 
legal disabilities for refusing to attend a wor- 
ship in which they could not conscientiously 
join; and priests were hung, drawn, and quar- 
tered for saying Mass even in private houses 
with the utmost seclusion, or indeed even for 
being priests. It was pretended that this was 
on account of treason ; that the fact of a priest 
entering England from foreign parts was a suffi- 
cient proof of treasonable design ; but the hol- 
lo wness of the pretence was often shown by the 
offer of pardon on the condition of apostasy. 

I do not deny, however, that there was in 
the Protestant English persecutions, long-con- 



3i8 



Persecution. 



tinued and bloody as they were, a genuine 
though unfounded scare about danger to the 
state from Catholics. The fact really is that 
in almost, if not quite all the persecutions of 
history, including those of the early Christians 
under pagan Rome, this has been the strong 
and principal motive. The Romans were will- 
ing enough to tolerate any religion unless they 
thought it threatened the peace of the state and 
the authority of the emperors ; and this has 
been the cause of persecution at other times as 
well, rather than simple religious rancor. It is 
Catholic or Protestant states, as a rule, that 
have persecuted, rather than Catholic or Prot- 
estant churches. The Spanish Inquisition, the 
great bugbear of Protestants and one of their 
great arguments against Catholicity, was spe- 
cially a work of the state, against the severity 
of which Rome constantly protested. 

That there may be, however, a fear, more or 
less reasonable, justifying a state in what may 
be properly called persecution on religious 
grounds, seems to be quite undeniable ; and, 
of course, a nation holding a false faith is justi- 
fied in conscience in persecuting as much as 
one holding a true faith, if it believes its faith 
to be true. 

Let us now briefly notice the second and third 
of the reasons against persecution first given. 
As to the second, no doubt opinion has changed 



Persecution, 319 

much in recent times as to whether it is expedient 
in many cases in which it is obviously justifi- 
able. This is just the puzzle at the present day 
with regard to anarchistic doctrines. Persecu- 
tion to some extent seems absolutely necessary ; 
but the question is, Will it not rather fan the 
flame than extinguish it? 

As to the third, we probably all admit that 
indignation is justly excited against the per- 
secutions of former times on account of what 
certainly seems to us their needlessly cruel 
and barbarous character. But we must re- 
member that they did not seem so to the 
people of those times. What would be in 
our judgment most cruel and atrocious punish- 
ments were constantly used then for all grave 
crimes; and false belief was -then considered by 
both Catholics and Protestants to be the great- 
est and most dangerous of all crimes. But the 
degree or severity of the punishment does not 
really enter at all into the principle of the 
thing. If persecution for religion's sake is 
really wrong in principle, it is as certainly 
wrong to fine a man a dollar for non-con- 
formity to the state religion as to burn him at 
the stake. 

Now, to look at the thing in a practical light, 
as the matter is to-day in this country and in 
the world in general. Judging from any indi- 
cations which we have at the present time, 



326 



Persecution. 



there can be little question that Catholics are 
far more tolerant toward Protestants than Pro- 
testants are toward them. That is notably the 
case right here among us ; you will seldom see 
any signs in this country of hatred on the part 
of Catholics for Protestants ; that of Protestants 
for Catholics is manifested continually. We do 
not altogether set this down to malice, however. 
It is plain that it is for the most part caused by 
the dense ignorance, wilful, it is true, to some 
extent, but still ignorance all the same, which 
still prevails among Protestants regarding the 
Catholic faith. And on the basis of this ignor- 
ance, the hatred becomes more or less excus- 
able. If our beliefs and practices were really 
what most Protestants still insist on believing 
them to be, in spite of the most earnest and 
often repeated denials on our part ; if even a 
tenth part of the old calumnies which they are 
continually handing down from generation to 
generation against us were true, there would 
really be ground for believing us to be danger- 
ous enemies to society and to the moral, intel- 
lectual, and material progress of humanity. 

We have no desire, and cannot very well 
have any, to persecute our countrymen ; for this 
reason, even w r ere there no others, that they are 
not, as a rule, wilful apostates from the known 
truth, but rather sufferers from a darkness and 
mental confusion coming down to them from 



I 

The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 321 

their ancestors ; and I heartily agree with the 
wish of Cardinal Gibbons "that religious in- 
tolerance may never take root in our favored 
land ; may the only king to force our conscience 
be the King of Kings ; may the only prison erected 
among us for the sin of unbelief or misbelief be 
the prison of a troubled conscience, and may 
our only motive for embracing truth be not the 
fear of man but the love of truth and of God ! " 

CHAPTER XXVII. 

THK CATHOUC UWS OP MARRIAGE. 

I HAVE spoken in the last chapter but one of 
the belief of the Catholic Church on the 
subject of marriage, and of the legislation she 
would desire in this matter. It will be well to 
explain this more . fully ; for many misappre- 
hensions exist regarding it. 

Those who are not Christians may naturally 
consider themselves free to speculate, and to 
legislate as far as possible on this matter, with- 
out admitting any end to be secured by it ex- 
cept merely natural well-being, or any guide or 
light regarding it except that which is fur- 
nished by human reason. But Christians, at 
least those who believe, as the vast majority of 
Christians do, in the teaching of the Bible, who 
recognize the words of Christ and His apostles 



322 The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 

as there recorded as being really the Word of 
God, cannot stand on this ground. They must 
and do believe marriage to be a Divine institu- 
tion, which man is not at liberty to tamper with 
according to his own will or fancy. And as the 
legislation of nations having a considerable 
Christian population may at the present day 
easily fall into the hands of unbelievers, there 
is evidently a probability here of such legisla- 
tion being contrary to the Christian conscience, 
and therefore such that it cannot be recognized 
or obeyed by Christians. No Christian, indeed 
no sincere believer in any religion, nay, more, 
no genuinely conscientious man, can always 
recognize human legislation as supreme or be- 
yond appeal. 

And there is no matter on which a conflict 
between any Church and the State is more like- 
ly now to occur than on this. The State of to- 
day recognizes marriage simply as a contract, 
subject to secular legislation as completely as 
an}^ other contract ; Christians, whether Catho- 
lic or Protestant, on the other hand, regard it 
as a Divine institution subject to laws with 
which the State cannot interfere. 

In principle or theory there is no difference 
between the attitude which a Catholic or that 
ivhich any other religious or conscientious man 
<nay have to assume in some cases toward the 
<aw of the State on this subject. And in no 



The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 323 



case does such attitude warrant a charge of 
opposition or enmity to free institutions, or to 
the nation to which we belong ; certainly it 
does so no more than did the conscientious ob- 
jection which many Northerners had before 
the war to the returning of fugitive slaves, 
which was required by national legislation. 
Such oppositions of conscience to law must 
occur occasionally, unless we abandon con- 
science itself and substitute for it a principle 
of blind obedience to a sovereign or to a ma- 
jority ; but conscience is really the strongest 
sanction to law that can exist ; so that nothing, 
even on the mere ground of expediency, would 
be gained, but much would be lost by the 
change. The most conscientious man is radi- 
cally the best and most loyal citizen ; and he is 
also effectively so — that is, he supports actually 
existing laws, on the whole, better than any 
other man, since the occasions on which he 
cannot support them are few and far between. 

Indeed, even on this matter, in which there 
is such a great divergence of theoretical view, 
the actual practical difficulty arising from the op- 
position of Church and State laws is compara- 
tively small. To see this, let us consider the 
actual laws of the Church regarding marri ige ; 
it will also be worth while for its own suke. 

Ja the first place, these laws, properly so- 
called, do not affect the unbaptizedo The 



324 The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 



Church makes laws for none but those who are, 
by right at least, her members. She does in- 
deed recognize Divine laws applicable to all 
men in the matter of marriage, as in other mat- 
ters ; she regards, for instance, a decree of di- 
vorce as not only illicit, but as null and void ; 
and she believes that no man can validly marry 
his sister, or have more than one wife at the 
same time. The principal practical application 
of her belief on these matters is, that a Catholic 
cannot conscientiously marry a divorced man or 
woman. But if the Catholic in question be- 
lieves the teaching of the Church on this point, 
he does not complain ; and surely no one else 
has a right to. Neither could there be much 
complaint if Catholics should be able to bring 
about a great modification or even a complete 
destruction of the civil laws regarding divorce ; 
Christians generally would approve, and un- 
believers would have no more right to object to 
this than to any other action endorsed by the 
majority. 

It is not, then, on these matters that trouble 
would be likely to arise. It is rather on the 
special laws which the Church does make for 
those belonging to her fold, which laws, of 
course, a non-Catholic state will not, as a rule, 
recognize. 

These laws are principally to the effect of 
prohibiting or invalidating marriage under cer- 



The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 325 

tain conditions ; and they are quite numerous. 
With regard to relationship, for instance, mar- 
riage is not admitted as valid between Catho- 
lics even so remotely related as third cousins ; 
nor is the marriage of a Catholic with an un- 
baptized person recognized. It is not con- 
sidered as possible to marry after receiving hoi} 
orders ; of this I have already spoken. Nor 
can one having the solemn vows of a religious 
order validly marry. Perhaps the most prac- 
tically important of all these provisions, as far 
as the State is concerned, is one not existing 
generally in this country, but prevailing over a 
great part of Europe, invalidating the marriage 
of Catholics unless celebrated in the presence 
of the parish priest and two witnesses. There 
are other laws than these making marriage in- 
valid ; others which simply prohibit without 
invalidating ; but those which I have men- 
tioned will suffice. The legislation of the 
Church on this point of impediments to mar- 
riage, as they are called, is quite complicated ; 
it is as impossible to explain it in a few words 
as it would be to put all the civil laws regarding 
contracts in a nutshell. That Catholics in- 
tending to marry should make no mistake 
nullifying their marriage in the sight of the 
Church, it is as necessary for them to consult a 
priest as it would be to consult a lawyer before 
drawing up a complicated legal document ; and 



326 The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 



I may say that it is mainly on this account that 
the law above mentioned has been made, mak- 
ing it absolutely necessary for them to get mar- 
ried in the presence of the priest, in order that 
he may know their case and be able to advise 
and warn them properly. And though this 
provision is not, as has been said, generally in 
force in this country, this cogent reason for it 
exists here as elsewhere. 

The Church, then, will often refuse to recog- 
nize as really married those whom the state 
regards as being so. As she will not accept as 
valid the remarriage to other parties of those 
who have obtained a civil divorce, so also she 
will not, where her law requiring the presence 
of the priest is in force, consider a merely civil 
marriage as being a marriage at all ; nor will 
she consider those as truly married between 
whom an invalidating impediment exists ac- 
cording to her law, though the parties them- 
selves, as well as the State, are quite ignorant 
of its existence. Also, vice versa, she must 
necessarily sometimes consider those as really 
married whom the State will not accept as 
such ; for instance, in countries where it is nec- 
essary by civil law that all must be married by 
the civil magistrate, the Church will regard as 
married all Catholics who have complied with 
her own rules, whether they have with those of 
the State or not. 



The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 327 



It must be remembered, however, that it is 
only concerning the baptized, who alone come 
nnder the jurisdiction of the Church, that she 
makes or can make special laws or regulations. 

And it must also be well understood that the 
laws which are made by the Church admit of 
dispensation in particular cases. Of this mat- 
ter of dispensation I have already spoken ; still 
it will be well to bring it up again, on account 
of its importance in the present connection. 
Let it not, then, be supposed that the Church 
meddles with, attempts to change, or makes 
exception to the laws of God in this or any 
other matter ; that she undertakes by any act 
of her own to make right what is wrong ac- 
cording to the Divine I,aw. In other words, 
she does not, as has been clearly stated before, 
give permission to commit sin, on any terms 
whatever. But it is an entirely different thing 
to make a rule which it is advisable should be 
observed on the whole, and to make exceptions 
to this rule in particular cases. This is no 
more giving permission to commit sin than it 
would be for the father of a family to require all 
to be in the house by ten o'clock at night, and 
then to allow some one to stay out later for 
special reasons. 

There are, then, in these rules of the Church 
regarding marriage, some of greater import- 
ance, some of less. It has been said that third 



328 The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 



cousins cannot validly marry, for instance ; this, 
of course, is not held to be part of the divine 
law; no, it is a rule made by the Church for 
her own subjects. It might be changed to- 
morrow, and the limit placed at second cousins, 
instead of third ; but it is considered best, on the 
whole, to keep it for the present as it is, in 
order to discourage the marriage of those who 
are blood relations. But in any particular case, 
where any reason can be presented, the im- 
portance of such a remote relationship is so 
slight that the law will readily be relaxed. 

On the other hand, the celibacy of the clergy 
is regarded as such an important matter that 
the law prohibiting those in holy orders to 
marry, and invalidating any marriage which 
they may attempt, is not dispensed for any pri- 
vate reasons, however grave or urgent they 
may seem. Indeed, it is obvious that were it 
otherwise the law would be in grave danger of 
being broken down. 

Still, it would be a very different matter to 
give permission for this, from what it would be 
to allow a man to have two wives at once ; for 
in this latter case we have a clear and certain 
Divine Law standing in the way. And the 
Church will never consent to allow the Divine 
Law to be broken. She was willing to lose 
England rather than sanction such an act; 
Catherine of Aragon being truly and indis- 



The Catholic Laws of Marriage, 325 



solubly married to Henry VIII., it waa Simply 
and utterly impossible to give consent to his 
marriage with another while she was still alive ; 
just as impossible as it would have been to 
allow him to murder her in order to re xiove the 
difficulty. If the Pope had been will) ag to act 
as Luther acted in his similar case, the Refor- 
mation would probably have been effectually 
checked in England by the royal pow^r; but the 
Pope, acting in accordance with Catholic princi- 
ples, -could not give permission for sin s or do evil 
that good might come, even though that good 
were the saving of a whole nation to the faith. 
/ Some cases, then, there may arise of serious 
and irremediable consequences coming from the 
inflexibility of the Church regarding the divine 
law; but though trouble may no doubt arise 
from the difference of her legislation from that 
of the State, this trouble would practically be 
entirely avoided if Catholics would take care 
always to consult the Church in this important 
matter. The trouble comes from their break- 
ing the laws of the Church through ignorance 
or contempt ; not from their breaking the laws 
of the State, or still less from any encourage- 
ment given them by the Church to do so. The 
State permits marriages which the Church will 
not recognize ; but it does not require anything 
which the Church will not permit, nor is it at 
all likely that it will forbid anything which the 



330 The Catholic Laws of Marriage. 



Church requires. Where, for instance, a law 
requiring civil marriage is in force, the Church 
allows the form to be gone through with, mere- 
ly instructing her members to regard this form 
as a mere contract of betrothal, to be ratified by 
the subsequent marriage in the Church ; the 
State makes no objection to this subsequent 
marriage, regarding it simply as a religious 
ceremony, no more to be prohibited than the 
reception of Holy Communion on the occasion 
would be. 

If Catholics, then, would be obedient to the 
Church, the State would have no complications 
to fear ; and it has no reasonable grounds of 
complaint against the Church, which is always 
ready to reinforce any prudent provisions 
which the civil law may make on this or any 
other subject. If the State, for instance, does 
not recognize marriages as valid between 
minors, the Church w r ill, for obvious reasons of 
prudence, see, so far as possible, that Catholics 
do not contract such marriages ; or if a civil 
license is required, the Church will see that it 
is obtained. The very watchfulness of the 
Church in this matter, which requires a careful 
inquiry into the circumstances of a marriage 
before allowing it to be contracted, though 
mainly intended to secure the observance of her 
own law r s, is of great assistance to the carrying 
out of those of the State as well. 




Use of the Latin Language. 331 



As a special instance of this may be men- 
Honed the law of the Church requiring the 
publication of the banns, as they are called, 
before marriage. This proceeding, as of course 
it is no part of the Divine L,aw, may be, and 
often is dispensed, if reason seems to exist for 
doing so ; but it is insisted on more and more 
at present, and undoubtedly will be unless 
some more effectual way of accomplishing the 
same result shall be substituted for it, 



CHAPTER XXVIII. 

USK OF THE LATIN LANGUAGE. 

MANY object to us that the services of. the 
Church are conducted, as a rule, in a 
language not understood by the people. As 
they have a deeply rooted idea that it is an 
essential part of our plan to keep the people in 
ignorance, this seems to them to give their idea 
strong confirmation. Some — and even well 
educated persons — imagine, astonishing as it 
appears to us, that we preach in Latin ! We 
feel flattered, of course, by such a compliment 
to our classical scholarship, though we feel it to 
be quite undeserved, for it is safe to say that 
the number of priests, in this country at least, 
capable of such an achievement, would be quite 



332 Use of the Latin Language. 



inadequate to furnish the multitude of sermons 
given in our churches. 

But the notion is an admirable instance of 
the force of the long-established prejudice 
under which our Protestant brethren labor, 
One would think they would ask themselves, 
why we should preach in Latin ; what would be 
our deep-laid scheme in doing so ? It is hard 
to conceive of any, except to impress the people 
with our learning ; and surely this could 
be more easily accomplished in some other 
way. 

It ought to be hardly necessary, then, to say 
that we do not preach in Latin, unless on oc- 
casions, as for instance at great councils of the 
Church, when that language will on the whole 
be better understood than any other. It is for 
this reason, that of better understanding by the 
mass of those addressed, that our theological 
books for the use of the clergy are written, as a 
rule, in Latin; because they are written not 
for the clergy of one nation, but for all nations ; 
and all the clergy are supposed to have enough 
learning to understand a book in Latin, though 
not perhaps to preach in that language ; where- 
as it would be unreasonable to expect every 
one to understand English or German, to say 
nothing of the objection other nations might 
have to see one so preferred. Indeed, the same 
plan was followed till quite lately in scientific 



Use of the Latin Language. 333 



books, intended to be read by scientific men 
throughout the world. 

But, to return to the original question, Why 
'is Latin used in the Church services ? Does 
not this prevent the people from following the 
service intelligently, and indeed from knowing 
what is going on ? 

Not at all. For those who are able to read 
can easily find just the precise meaning of the 
words the priest is saying, by means of the 
translations put in the common prayer-books ; 
and those who cannot read can have these 
translations read to them. What a pity it is 
that you cannot get rid of this curious notion 
that we have secrets which we want to keep 
back from the people ! You have only to get a 
prayer-book at the nearest Catholic booir-store, 
or borrow one, and you will find the services of 
the Church given as far as possible ; though of 
course there are smaller books, which many pre- 
fer, in which there are other devotions instead. 

I say that in the prayer-books the services of 
the Church are given as far as possible ; but it 
is really not possible, owing to the shiftings 
which have to be made to adjust the fixed and 
the movable calendar, to give all the details of 
those prayers which are changed from day to 
day. Still, missals for the laity are published, 
which enable this to be done to a considerable 
extent, and those who wish can use them. It 



334 Use of the Latin Language. 



is found, however, that most people prefer to 
use other prayers appropriate to the time, and 
not to be obliged to follow exactly on the lines 
and rules which the priest has to observe. But 
there are plenty of occasions on which the ser- 
vice, being of a somewhat simpler character, 
can be, and is intended to be, followed word by 
word ; so that those who specially enjoy this 
form of worship have an ample opportunity to 
gratify their taste. 

One special reason why it is unadvisable that 
the prayers of the more important part of the 
Mass should be said aloud like those used on 
the occasions of which I have just spoken, and 
the prayers in Protestant churches generally, 
and especially why it would not be well to say 
them ; .n the vernacular or common language of 
the people is, that the Mass, as it must be re- 
membered, is our Communion service. Now, in 
Protestant churches only a certain select num- 
ber of the whole congregation are present at 
this service ; and all of them are presumed to 
be in specially reverent and attentive dispo- 
sitions, prepared to understand the service, and 
to join in it piously. But it is quite otherwise 
with the Catholic Mass. All Catholics are not 
only requested, but required to be present at it 
on Sundays and holydays of obligation ; and 
non-Catholics may also well be there, many of 
whom may know nothing, or next to nothing, 



Use of the Latin Language. 335 



about our religion or about the Christian reli- 
gion in any form. It would, therefore, evidently 
be imprudent to recite aloud in the vernacular 
tongue the solemn and sacred words used by 
the priest on this occasion, and especially those 
relating to the consecration of the bread and 
wine ; and indeed no reason can possibly be 
given why they should be so recited, as all 
those who are rightly interested in them can 
find them in their prayer-books ; for the words 
of this more important part, the " canon of the 
Mass," as they are called, are precisely the 
same every day. 

It seems, then, plain enough, for this reason 
as well as for the one previously given or im- 
plied, that of not forcing every one into precise- 
ly the same form of worship, that the services 
of the Church cannot well be all given in a 
loud voice and in the vernacular. It is evi- 
dently better to recite a considerable part of 
them quietly ; for these, all that is necessary 
is that people should not be in ignorance of 
what is said ; and of this, as has been seen, 
there is no danger. And, as long as a trans- 
lation is provided, the language in which they 
are said is immaterial. 

Still, it may be urged that those parts which 
are said aloud, or sung at High Mass, ought to 
be in the common language of the people. 
And it cannot be denied that these would be 



336 use of the Latin Language. 



edifying and interesting to many of those pres- 
ent if these parts were given in a language 
which they understood ; particularly those 
which are not the same every day, but have 
reference to the special feast which is being 
celebrated ; but, on the other hand, others might 
object to being distracted from their own de- 
votions. 

An advantage is gained, however, by having 
even these in L,atin, which has not yet been 
mentioned. It is this : that, in the present 
arrangement, the service is the same in one 
country and another, so that Catholic travellers 
or emigrants find themselves at once at home in 
any Catholic Church wherever they may go ; 
and they feel at one with all other Catholics in 
every place. Whereas, if it were otherwise, a 
Catholic German would feel like a stranger in 
his own church in France ; and the wall of 
separation which difference of language builds 
up between people of various nations coming to 
settle in a country like our own would be 
strengthened, instead of broken down as it 
should be. As this country wishes to have all 
foreigners coming here to live to be at home in 
it, and to become Americans, so the Church 
wishes all her members in matters of religion 
to be Catholics, not Frenchmen, Germans, or 
Italians. I<et them be Germans or Frenchmen 
at home, and Americans when they come here 



Use of the Latin Language. 33 J 



in all political and national matters ; but ifi 
those which concern religion let there be 
unity, so far as it can be maintained. And the 
one language of religion helps to secure this, 
especially as it is a language not belonging to 
any now existing nation. No other language 
besides the Latin could have these advantages, 
at least in Europe and here ; for the languages 
of Europe are to a great extent founded on it ; 
it is a sort of common ground, on which they 
all meet. 

It must not, however, be imagined that Latin 
is considered essential by the Catholic Church. 
Other languages are used in the church service 
by various peoples which are in union with us. 
The principal reason why, in point of fact, the 
Catholic nations of Europe have their Mass and 
other principal acts of worship in Latin, is that 
they were converted to the faith by missionaries 
sent by the Roman Church at the time of the 
Roman Empire, when Latin was the language 
generally used in the western part of that em- 
pire, where the converted nations mostly lay. 
But if the Greek or the Russian Church were 
united with us, as we hope they may be at 
some time not far distant, they would in all 
probability desire and be willingly allowed, and 
perhaps even required, to keep their ancient 
liturgies unchanged. 

I hope enough has been said to persuade you 



338 Ceremonies and Rites of the Church. 



that we do not pray in Latin in order to mystify 
our people ; for that, after all, is the real point 
of importance. Depend on it, my dear friends, 
you are the only ones who are mystified; and , 
you only are so because you will not come close 
up to us, and examine to see just what we are 
like ; you stand off and see us dimly and con- 
fusedly through the dust and mist that three 
centuries of prejudice and misunderstanding 
have raised to blind your eyes. 

CHAPTER XXIX. 

CEREMONIES AND RITES OF THE CHURCH. 

ONE objection to the Catholic Church, which 
has great practical weight in the minds of 
many and perhaps of most people who have 
been brought up in Protestantism, is that she 
has too many rites and ceremonies. Our wor- 
ship seems to them to consist principally in 
dressing up in different kinds of vestments, 
moving to and fro, bowing and genuflecting, 
ringing bells and burning incense ; the whole 
being accompanied with various sorts of musical 
performances. They fail to see in this any 
kind of prayer or praise ; it seems to them to be 
a spectacle intended to amuse or interest the 
audience, rather than the offering of an hor"age 
to the Divine Majesty, 



Ceremonies and Rites of the Church. 339 

These ideas are perhaps more common in 
America than in any other part of the Christian 
world ; and come, no doubt, to a great extent 
from the Puritan ancestry from which so many 
of us are descended. And yet it seems strange 
that a people like these ancestors of ours, whose 
religion was based so largely on the Old Testa- 
ment, should have failed to recognize in its 
pages the Divine approval of ceremonial in wor- 
ship, not merely intimated in a general wjay 
but carried out in the Mosaic law with great 
detail. The rites of the Catholic Church are 
surely not more magnificent than those of Solo- 
mon's temple. 

" Well,'' it may be said, " that is true. But 
we know that the Old L,aw was abrogated at 
the coming of Christ. He told us that God is 
a Spirit ; and that they who worship Him must 
worship in spirit and in truth.' ' Certainly, we 
all admit that. But did not Solomon himself, 
when he built the temple, and until his heart 
was turned to strange gods, worship the one 
God in spirit and in truth ? Why cannot God 
be worshipped outwardly as well as inwardly ? 
What did our Lord Himself say, when He con- 
demned the Pharisees for tithing mint and rue 
and every herb, and passing over judgment 
and the love of God? He said (Iyuke xi. 42): 
* ' Now these things you ought to have done, 
and not to leave those undone.' ' 



34° Ceremonies and Rites of the Church. 



But it may still be asked : ■ * Do not you 
Catholics make too much of these outward rites 
and forms, just as the Jews did of old ; do you 
not consider them of more importance than the 
ten commandments, or at least act as if you so 
considered them ? ' ' To this I would answer, 
that a Catholic must be indeed poorly ac- 
quainted with his religion who could entertain 
such an idea for a moment. Such an one there 
may be ; such, however, I do not remember 
ever to have met. And as to the mind of the 
Church, and the teaching of her doctors and 
theologians, there can be no doubt whatever, 
It is allowed on all hands that the rubrics, as 
we call the rules of the Church concerning rites 
and ceremonies, are in many cases not binding- 
under sin at all ; or, in other words, that many 
of them really do not have the force of law; that 
they are, as we say, ' ' directive/ ' not "pre* 
ceptive." In others, however, they are un- 
doubtedly of obligation, especially where they 
concern the holy Sacrifice of the Mass. But 
even here they are acknowledged to be of less 
w r eight than the obligations of the natural or of 
the Divine Law. Even the strict fulfilment of 
the conditions laid down by Clirist for the 
Sacraments themselves may sometimes be jeo- 
pardized for the sake of man, for whom the 
Sacraments were established. In case, for ex- 
ample, of danger in delay, we not only dispense 



Ceremonies and Rites of the Church. 34A 



with the solemnities which the Church has ap- 
pointed to accompany baptism, but we even 
baptize with water which is certainly unfit and 
perhaps even inadequate to the purpose, repeat- 
ing the ceremony afterward if there be time. 
Catholics realize fully the words of Christ 
(Mark ii. 27) : " The Sabbath was made for 
man, and not man for the Sabbath." 

The idea that we are such sticklers for cere- 
monies is absurd to one who really knows us ; 
the danger of our neglecting them is greater 
than of our increasing them. Equally or more 
so is the idea that we rely on them mainly for 
the conversion of the heathen. Missionaries, 
when they go to pagan countries, cannot usu- 
ally take with them what is required for the 
solemn observance of ecclesiastical functions ; 
and if they could they could seldom use them, 
on account of the danger of exciting persecution 
by public displays of that or any sort. The 
teaching of the faith by them in heathen lands 
is more like what you might find here in the 
poorest kind of Sunday-school. 

But it may still be objected: " What, after 
all, is the use of these rites and ceremonies 
anyway, especially in this enlightened age?" 
To this the plain answer is the same as that 
given before, when we were talking about im- 
ages and pictures. Ceremonies are, like these, 
a means of fixing the attention on things them- 



342 Ceremonies and Rites of the Church^ 

selves invisible, which are represented by them. 
Our thoughts are apt to stray if they have 
nothing to fix them but bare walls. Man, 
though a spirit, is not merely a spirit ; he has a 
body and bodily senses, to which religion must 
appeal, and bring them to the lines on which he 
wishes his soul to proceed. The world, the 
flesh, and the devil appeal to the soul by means 
of the senses ; why should we not turn their 
own weapons against them, by ceremonial, as 
well as by music, which Protestants themselves 
generally use as a lawful means to this end ? 

But it is not only for man's sa^ke that we 
should employ these means ; no, it is for God's 
sake as well. It is right that we should honor 
Him by offering Him all that is in itself good 
and beautiful which we have to give. The 
ceremonial of the Church mainly centres round 
His Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament 
which reposes on our altars ; it is to Him there 
concealed that it is rendered, like the precious 
ointment poured on His feet by Mary Magdalen. 

He was rebuked for allowing this, you know, 
but it was the faithless Judas who rebuked 
Him, and claimed that the ointment should 
have been sold and the price given to the poor. 
Is it not, then, following in his steps, to rebuke 
us for wasting money on our I,ord? At any 
rate, do not do so until you are ready to take 
from the furnishing and beautifying of your 




The Good and the Bad in the Church. 343 



houses what we spend on the house of God, or 
until you can show that you, to say nothing of 
your superior means, devote even absolutely as 
much as we do to the help of the poor whom 
He loves. 

CHAPTER XXX. 

THK GOOD AND THE BAD IN THE CHURCH. 

I COME now, finally, to an objection, the 
most forcible one, perhaps, that can be 
made against us ; for it is one which really has 
a strong foundation in fact. It is urged against 
us, that if our organization be really, as it 
claims to be, the true Church of God, it ought 
to bear more plainly in the conduct of its mem- 
bers the marks of its Divine origin. Those who 
are separated from us say : " If Catholics, as a 
rule, led lives of notable piety and holiness ; if 
they were plainly distinguished from others by 
their superior virtue ; if they were evidently 
mere just, truthful, pure, sober, and temperate 
than those around them ; if it could be seen 
from their conduct that their hearts were set on 
things above, not on those of this world ; then 
indeed we would be more inclined to acknowl- 
edge that they were the true followers of Him 
who gave to us the great example of what man 
ought to be. 1 By their fruits/ He said, 'ye 



344 



The Good and the Bad in the Church. 



shall know them f ; but we do not see the 
fruits in the lives of most of the Catholics with 
whom we meet." 

As I have said, I do not deny the force of 
this objection. That Catholics are not what 
they ought to be is indeed a cause of reproach ; 
it is truly a scandal, a rock of offence, a stum- 
bling-block to unbelievers for which they are 
to blame. 

But it should in justice be noted that it is 
one w r hich our Lord Himself, in founding His 
Church, foresaw and foretold. "It is impossi- 
ble, 99 He said (Luke xvii. i), "that scandals 
should not come : but woe to him through 
whom they come." The same prediction is re- 
corded by St. Matthew (xviii. 7). And He 
distinctly announced that His Church should 
not be composed entirely of the good, but large- 
ly of the bad. He compared the kingdom of 
heaven (Matt. xiii. 24-30) to a man who sowed 
good seed in his field, w T ith which good seed 
was mixed cockle or tares, sown by his enemy ; 
at the time of the harvest the wheat from the 
good seed w r as gathered into the barn, while 
the cockle w T as burned. And again, even more 
plainly (same chapter, 47-48), He said that the 
kingdom of heaven was like a net cast into the 
sea, gathering together all kind of fishes, of 
which the good w r ere kept, the bad thrown 
*way. And yet again (Matt, xxv- i-ia). it i& 



The Good and the Bad in the Church. 345 



compared to ten virgins, five of whom were 
wise, five foolish. 

Now, in these passages it is plain that by the 
kingdom of heaven is meant the Church on 
earth. For He says that at the end of the 
world (Matt. xiii. 41) : " The Son of man shall 
send his angels, and they shall gather out of 
his kingdom all scandals, and them that work 
iniquity." But, as St. Gregory remarks, inr 
His kingdom above no scandals or workers of 
iniquity are to be found, to be gathered out. 

Protestants have generally labored to con- 
struct a church on earth unlike this which our 
Lord described ; that is to say, a church con* 
sisting entirely of good people. Church-mem- 
bers, with them, usually have to make a special 
profession of religion ; they are supposed to get 
religion by a particular favor conferred on them 
from on high. In some denominations, it is 
supposed also that if one once really gets reli- 
gion he cannot lose it; he is justified and 
sanctified from that time on, and his life is ex- 
pected to correspond with the particular favoi 
which he has received. If he backslides al- ' 
together, this can be accounted for by his never 
really having got religion at all; though in 
Luther's mind, as has before been observed, a 
careless and sinful life would have been no 
argument against such an one, if he still kept 
ip a lively faith that he had been saved by 



346 The Good and the Bad in the Church. 

Christ. But this would hardly do now, and 
indeed it could hardly have ever worked in 
practice ; practically, with most of our Protest- 
ants, a man or woman who is a church-member 
must lead a good life, such as is worthy, at 
least in appearance, of the profession which is 
made. 

But with us all this is different. Every one 
jvho is baptized is with us a member of the 
Church, just as much as the Pope himself. 
There is no distinction with us between com- 
municants and non-communicants, except what 
comes from the consideration that very young 
children cannot be expected to communicate 
intelligently, so that it is advisable that they 
should not receive until the age, say, of ten or 
eleven. But there is no hard-and-fast line 
drawn even here ; some children who are spe- 
cialty intelligent or pious make their first Com- 
munion at an earlier age. And the practice 
has prevailed at some times and places of giv- 
ing Communion even to infants. I need hardly 
say that this does not exist here with us. 

It is true that Catholics are sometimes * 1 ex- 
communicated," as we say, until such time as 
they repent for specially grievous or scandalous 
sins, committed in defiance of the excommuni- 
cation which may be attached to such sins* 
But this is rare ; one is not excommunicated 
simply by leading a careless or even a sinful life. 



The Good and the Bad in the Church. 347 



The result of our discipline is, of course, that 
we have, in accordance with our ford's pre- 
diction, a large number of negligent or even 
notably vicious people, whose lives are a scan- 
dal to the Church, and reprobated by it in the 
plainest way, but who still hold on to their 
faith and must be considered as Catholics. 
We may sometimes wonder that they do not 
abandon the Church whose instructions they 
confessedly do not follow ; but if they do not 
the Church does not expel them, except in the 
extreme or special cases above mentioned, but 
still counts them as her children, and patiently 
hopes and waits for their repentance and return, 
at least at ttie hour of death. The tares are 
allowed to grow up with the wheat, to be sepa- 
rated finally only by God and His angels at the 
judgment, not before, according to our Iyord's 
words already quoted. We should make great 
mistakes if we should try to separate them 
here; we should, as He has warned us, root 
up the wheat with the tares; for often those 
who have sinned turn to God, and persevere to 
the end ; while those who for a long time have 
served Him sometimes fall away. 

No comparison can, then, justly be made be- 
tween Catholic and Protestant church-members 
or even church-goers ; for all Catholics, practi- 
cally, are church- members until they formally 
renounce their faith, while only a select num- 



348 The Good and the Bad in the Church. 



ber of Protestants are so ; and Catholics, as a 
rule, however bad their lives, go to Mass oc- 
casionally at least, and very probably regularly, 
while Protestants are very apt to stay at home. 

But it may be still urged that the conduct of 
Protestants at large, irrespective of church- 
membership, is better than that of Catholics. 
I would say to this, that were it true it would 
perhaps prove too much for those to w T hom 
these pages are principally addressed ; that is, 
for sincere and practical non- Catholic Chris- 
tians, who believe in the Christian religion and 
live according to their idea of it. For a very 
large proportion, if not indeed an actual ma- 
jority of Protestants, at least in* this country, 
are simply that and nothing more ; that is to 
say, they protest, as their fathers did, against 
the Catholic Church, but their religion stops at 
that. There is nothing positive about it ; in 
other words, they simply have no faith, Chris- 
tian or otherwise. Take care, then, that you do 
not undermine the ground on which you your- 
selves stand, by adducing arguments which 
may only go to prove that Christianity is worse 
than no religion at all. 

In point of fact, however, the arguments 
which you draw from your own observation of 
things immediately around you, or in this 
country, generally have little bearing on the 
question. The ordinary criminality which at- 



The Good and the Bad in the Church. 349 



tracts your attention is rather due to lack of 
education and of worldly means than to any 
other cause. Education, the cultivation of the 
intellect, has a double effect in this regard. It 
withdraws a man somewhat from the lower and 
more animal temptations, by giving him some- 
thing else to think about ; at the same time it 
enables him to conceal his sins more skilfully, 
and to plan them more artfully. And wealth 
secures him from the ordinary smaller and open 
sins against property, at the same time enabling 
him better to protect himself from the conse- 
quences of dishonesty. It may well be ques- 
tioned whether education and wealth make men 
really better ; but they certainly make them 
apparently so, as a rule. The comparison, then, 
between one religious or irreligious belief and 
another, made from ordinary superficial statis- 
tics, is not fair till these causes of difference are 
removed or due allowance made for them. 
Men, like things, otherwise similar must be- 
taken for comparison, if we are going to ascer- 
tain the effect of some particular disparity, as 
that of religion, now in question. 

And it must be remembered that it is not our 
fault that the Catholics of this country have, as 
a rule, hitherto occupied a lower position with 
regard to these worldly gifts than their fellow- 
citizens. Those of them from whom you most- 
ly draw your conclusions have been deprived 



350 The Good and the Bad in the Church. 



of these advantages, and deprived of them, not 
by their religion but on account of their reli- 
gion. England has for centuries taken from 
them the necessary means of acquiring wealth 
and knowledge, except on the condition that 
they would renounce their faith ; this is simply 
history, and an unspeakably disgraceful page 
of it. Englishmen, and the descendants of 
Englishmen, ought to be ashamed to speak of 
persecution, after this crushing of the minds 
and bodies of a whole nation for hundreds of 
years. And yet some of them would continue 
the same work here. 

To resume. We are anxious that Catholics 
should acquire the same advantages as others, 
provided that they do not set their hearts more 
on the wisdom and goods of this world than on 
those which are from above ; and we are mak- 
ing up the difference, as you cannot fail to see, 
as fast as } r ou will let us. 

The fairest comparison which can now be 
made between the effects of the Catholic religion 
and the various Protestant forms of Christian- 
ity, would be that between those who carry out 
in their lives their respective precepts. We are 
not at all afraid to put the conduct of practical 
Catholics, who approach the sacraments regu- 
larly, against that of any other church-members. 

The general question, however, of the rela- 
tive morality of Catholic and Protestant coun- 



The Good and the Bad in the Church. 351 



tries all over the world, in which the differences 
of which I have spoken are of course to some 
extent removed, is, no doubt, of great interest, 
and the results, when thoroughly treated, may 
somewhat surprise you. Books have been 
written on this subject, which is too extensive 
to be treated here ; one quite lately, and now 
easily obtainable, by Rev. A. Young, C.S.P.. 
under the title Catholic and Protestant Countries 
compared. 

But do not forget for a moment that we by 
no means claim that because a man is a Catho- 
lic, he is necessarily better than one who is 
not. So far is this from being the case, that 
bad Catholics who live regardless of the laws 
and the morality of the Church may easily be, 
and often are, worse than if they did not belong 
to it. There is a I,atin proverb, " Corruptio 
optimi pessimal) which means, "The cor- 
ruption of what was best is the worst of all 
corruption." And indeed it is plain, if the, 
Catholic religion is what we claim, that he who 
sins against it is worse than others, as sinning 
against the greater light. But this is no rea- 
son for our not coming to the light, and follow- 
ing its guidance. " The kingdom of heaven/ ' 
says our Divine Saviour (v. 45-46 of the chap- 
ter of St. Matthew already quoted), " is like a 
merchant seeking good pearls ; who, when he 
tad found one pearl of great price, went his 



352 



Conclusion. 



way, and sold all that he had, and bought it/ 1 
Let us, like him, all the more show our appre- 
ciation of that pearl of great price, which others 
have despised. 



CHAPTER XXXI. 

CONCLUSION. 

I CANNOT well close this book without say- 
ing a few words about the attitude of the 
Church regarding two vices, which it is sup- 
posed by some Protestants not merely not to 
condemn, but even to encourage. And yet it 
ought hardly to be necessary to do so, as the 
Catholic teaching concerning them is simply 
that of reason and common sense. 

The vices of which I speak are those of 
drunkenness and gambling. Let us take them 
separately, though really the treatment both 
of these subjects is much the same. 

The Catholic Church, then, does not condemn 
the drinking of wine or other alcoholic liquors 
as bad or sinful in itself. It sanctions the use 
of fermented wine for Mass, in which the priest 
receives Communion under this form, as has 
been said. And the common opinion among 
us, and indeed among Christians generally, is 
that our Lord partook of such wine also on 
other occasions, and that its use is approved in 



Conclusion. 



353 



other passages of Holy Scripture. And there 
seems to be no reason why other similar drinks 
may not be used as well as wine, reasonable 
limits being observed. 

But the Church has always condemned the 
excessive or intemperate use of such drinks, 
and always regarded drunkenness as a mortal 
sin ; and a very grievous and dangerous one 
too, it being the cause and source of most of the 
others into which men commonly fall. More- 
over, as there are many persons who cannot 
touch any kind of spirituous drink without go- 
ing to excess, total abstinence from it is for 
these many an absolute necessity ; for such, 
even to taste it would be a mortal sin. And 
the Church has, especially in these times, when 
the evil has become so rampant, set her face 
very strongly against the indiscriminate sale of 
strong drink, and the saloon business generally. 
She also encourages total abstinence as the best 
of all mortifications, even for those who do not 
need it as a safeguard. 

With regard to gambling, the state of the 
question is, as has been said, very similar. To 
risk money on events determined by what we 
call chance, is not itself clearly condemned 
either by reason or the law of God. There is 
lio reason in the nature of things why a con- 
tract should not be made, with conditions de- 
termined by chance, as well as one with fixed 



354 



conditions, if the chances are fair all round, and 
the stake not so large that some one or more of 
the parties cannot properly afford to take the 
risk. Would you object, for instance, to toss- 
ing up to see whether you or your friend 
should undertake some work, which one of you 
had to do ? If not, then you see no harm in 
the principle of the thing, which is the same 
throughout. But if this thing, which seems 
innocent in itself, is prohibited by some positive 
Divine Law, such law should be proved to 
exist. 

It is with gambling as with drink. It is the 
excess, and the passion for it, which makes the 
danger. And no doubt it is a terrible one. 
Gambling *is a strong temptation, a road to 
ruin, for very many, unquestionably ; and the 
Church easily agrees with the State, when the 
latter legislates against public lotteries and 
gaming-houses on this account, as well as on 
account of- the unfairness and cheating often 
connected with them. 



I have now, my dear friends and fellow-coun- 
trymen, gone over, as far as space will permit, 
what seem to be the principal objections likely 
tc exist in your minds against the Catholic 
Church. 1 have not, as you will notice, en- 
deavored to prove its doctrines by positive 



Conclusion. 



arguments ; but simply to show that what you 
value and cherish as your Christian inheritance, 
it also holds ; and that what it teaches over 
and above this is not what your imagination, 
warped by the prejudices and the false tra- 
ditions handed down from generation to genera- 
tion, would have it to be. If you wish to know 
our teaching and our practice more in detail, 
there is nothing to prevent your knowing them. 
Our book-stores are full of works on these sub- 
jects, from the simplest catechism to the most 
profound theology ; and in them you may, per- 
haps, place more confidence than in what I have 
presented to you here ; for our books, in general, 
are written for Catholics ; and in them you will 
hardly expect special pleading, such as you 
may perhaps look for in a work like this. 

Read, then, some at least of these books, writ- 
ten by Catholics for Catholics ; if not in search 
of conviction, at least for information; that 
when you speak or write about what we hold 
and teach, you may at least do so intelligently. 
One need not know everything, but it is well to 
know what one is talking about. There may 
be, there no doubt are, many subjects in the 
range of human knowledge about which you 
need not inform yourselves ; there is not indeed 
time even for the greatest minds to learn all 
that is to be learned in this world. But the 
subject of religion, especially when it is the re- 



356 



Conclusion. 



ligion held by the vast majority of Christians 
through the world, over three hundred million 
at least — for the Greek, Russian, and Eastern 
Churches hold substantially the same faith as 
we — is too important a one to be lightly passed 
over, especially when all the information you 
have hitherto had about it has come from per- 
sons having the same prejudices that you have 
yourselves. 

If you hold any special form of Protestant 
religion, or even if you are merely definitely 
and decidedly a Protestant, objecting to and 
protesting against the Catholic Church, the 
obligation of inquiry is stronger than it would 
be if 3'ou were simply indifferent ; though that 
you cannot reasonably be. For you ought to 
know, from original information, not as you 
think you do now, from second-hand authority, 
what it is that }'OU are protesting against. If 
you protest against the bad morals which have 
existed and must necessarily exist in the 
Church of God, not only among the laity but 
even to some extent among the clergy them- 
selves, know that we join with you most heart- 
ily in these protests, and that all good men in 
the Church, its authorities, both rulers and 
teachers especially, are always laboring to re- 
form its moral life and to correct practical 
abuses. We do not deny that reformation of 



Conclusion. 



this kind in it is always needed ; and it was 
no doubt particu 1 arly needed when Luther set 
about his self-imposed task. Side by side with 
him and his followers the Council of Trent, 
assembled in the name of the Church, was at 
work carrying out a true reformation, amending 
discipline and teaching true faith and morals 
against the prevailing errors of the day. 

But if you think that your protest goes far- 
ther than this, be sure, as I have said, just pre- 
cisely what it is and against what it is made. 
Do not make a protest against some dogma or 
some rule of morals which the Church never 
dreamed of maintaining, and against which it 
would protest as strongly as you. 

And even if you find anything, though I 
hardly think you will, in the real teaching of 
the Church which seems too difficult to believe, 
remember, if, as I suppose, you wish to be a 
Christian, that after all the presumption is in 
her favor, as the interpreter of what Christ and 
His apostles really taught ; that is, as to what 
Christianity really is. Do not at once be sure 
that you know more about this than the Church 
which has existed from the beginning, because 
you are in possession of some writings of the 
evangelists and apostles which the Church her- 
self preserved for you. She has and accepts all 
that you have, and more. It is simply a ques- 



358 



Conclusion, 



tion as to which knows most on the subject; 
she, with the wisdom of the ages, or you with 
yours of yesterday ; she with the commission 
of Christ to teach the world, you with one com- 
ing only from yourself. Is it not, to say the 
least, more likely that the Holy Spirit which 
rested on the Apostles in the beginning should 
be with their duly appointed successors than 
with yourself ? Surely one ought to be careful, 
and think and pray long and hard, and be sure 
that he has a special call from God, before un- 
dertaking to reform an institution which Christ 
placed in the world, and with which He 
promised He would always be. 

But as for us, we will not find fault with yd! 
in your difficulties ; especially such of us as 
have been where you now stand. All we ask 
is that you would be candid and sincere, 
earnestly desiring to know the truth ; that you 
will not, for the sake of pride or any worldly 
consideration, refuse to attend to the plain facts 
which I have presented specially to you, 
Americans like myself, and that you will act 
according to your conscience on the knowledge 
w T hich you may here or elsewhere obtain. 
And it should be remembered that this is not 
a merely speculative subject. To consider it 
properly, something more is required besides 
candor and sincerity ; and that is a realization 



Conclusion. 359 

of the supreme importance of the matter in 
hand. 

The question is simply this : Has Almighty 
God established in this world a means not only 
for the "preservation of His truth, but also for 
the pardon and reparation of sin, such as the 
Catholic Church claims to be ? Does he com- 
mand us, not only to listen to its voice, to be 
enlightened and instructed by it, but to come 
to it, to belong to it, and to receive its Sacra- 
ments, in order to cleanse our souls from sin, 
and to conquer in our struggle with tempta- 
tion? 

If you, reader, feel no danger from sin, no 
need of forgiveness for it, no difficulty in over- 
coming it, this question 'may not come home to 
you. But if, like the rest of us, you do feel 
the weight of sin upon you, the most important 
and practical of all questions for you is, * ' What 
means has God provided that I may rid myself 
of it, and keep myself from it? What shall I 
do to be saved ? ' ' 

And it is a question which must be asked, 
xiot merely of our own reason or common sense 
but of Him who alone can assure us of the true 
answer to it. One must turn to God, one must 
pray, to know with certainty the answer to this 
most momentous of questions. Do not say, 
14 My father's, or my mother's religion is good 



36o 



Conclusion. 



enough for me 9 9 ; for nothing short of the truth 
is good enough for anybody in this matter. 
The first thing is to free yourself from preju- 
dice, not to take for granted that you know all 
about it, to listen to reason ; but this done, do 
something more. Ask God to give you the 
light to know His will, and the strength to 
obey it, whatever may be the sacrifice required. 
Say, as St. Paul did when he began to see 
that it was God whom he had been opposing, 
"L,ord, what wilt Thou have me to do? M 



INDEX. 



Absolution, never paid for, 236. 

Abstinence and fasting- enjoined in Scripture, 209-210. 
All Catholics not saved, 112. 
Anarchy, 311. 

Bad Catholics predicted by Christ, 344. 

Bible, canon of, 50-54; Catholics believe in it as God's 
Word, 16, 17, 28; Catholics encouraged to read it, 
153; common before Luther's time, 152; in the 
schools, 151, 154, 155; manner of its formation, 20, 
26 ; many important things not recorded in it, 21, 23; 
no certainty that it contains the whole revelation, 
24, 26 ; not written by Christ, 26 ; Protestant mistake 
as to, 18; scholarship required to show its authen- 
ticity, 27; scope of the Epistles, 21, 22. 

3. V. Mary, Assumption of, 79, 80 ; Mother of God, 74, 
75 ; Protestant ideas about, 77, 83 ; sinlessness of, 79 
(see Immaculate Conception); title of Blessed, 76; 
virginity, 81. 

Careless Catholics, 214, 215. 

Celibacy, obvious advantages of, 244 ; not everywhere 
required, 245 ; perfectly compatible with purity, 248; 
principal object of, 251. 

Ceremonies, reasons for, 341, 342 ; easily dispensed with, 
341. 

Charity, meaning and necessity of, 1 16. 

Christ, Divine and Human natures in His Person, 71 ; 

Passion of, 69 ; we are saved by His merits, 70, 115. 
Christianity, where we should naturally look for it, 10. 
Church, authority less than that of Bible, 60; councils of, 

37, 186, 187; supposed opposition to republics, 303 ; 

to science, 274, 282 ; true meaning of obedience to, 

198, 199, 201. 



ii 



Index. 



Communicants, 214, 346. 
Communion in one kind, 99, 100. 

Confession, annual, 213 ; benefits of, 242 ; burdensome to 
priests, 236; made by clergy as by laity, 41, 237 ; not 
a cause of sin, 239; punishments for abuse of, 240; 
secrecy attached to, 238 ; why required, 233. 

Consubstantiation, 94. 

Contributions, required in justice, 216, 217. 

Contrition, perfect and imperfect, 234 ; false, 235. 

Converts, character of, 13. 

Crime, commonly so called, reasons for, 349. 

Destruction, sudden, of the earth, not contrary to 
science, 134. 

Discipline of the secret, 62, 65, 87, 189. 

Dispensations, meaning- and scope of, 229, 327 ; not given 
in matters of morality, 229, 328. 

Doubt among Catholics, cause moral rather than intellec- 
tual, 296. 

Drunkenness, 352, 353. 

End does not sanctify means, 231, 232. 
Eutychians or Monophysites, 72. 
Evolution, 276, 282. 
Excommunication, 346. 

Extreme Unction, 109; useless without repentance, no. 

Faith, true meaning of, 290. 

Fasting, rules of, 212. 

Free speech, necessary limits of, 310, 311. 

Gambling, 353, 354. 

Good works, conditions for value of, 1 18-120; must be 
united to Christ's merits, 120-125 ; use of for atone- 
ment of sin, 122. 

Government, Church, form of and reasons for, 146, 299; 
American system of, approved by Church, 304. 

Heaven and hell, 141. 
Heresy, hatred of, 189. 

History, Catholic protest against perversions of, 1 59. 



Index. 



iii 



Identity, what is meant by it, 136. 

Ignorance of Protestants about Catholic doctrine, 3 ; sup- 
posed, of priests regarding science, 275. 

Images, evidently not altogether forbidden, 165. 

Immaculate Conception, misunderstandings about, 82, 83 ; 
true meaning of, 85. 

Incarnation, 67, 68. 

Indulgences, canonical meaning of, 224; natural mean- 
ing of, 22i, 222; not permissions for sin, 227; re- 
pentance necessary for, 225. 

Infallibility, acts only on proper occasions, 43 ; claimed 
by Protestants on all occasions, 45 ; concerns moral 
.questions, .42 ; conditions attached to, 38 ; not con- 
cerned with natural science, 38 ; not impeccability, 
39, 40 ; not inspiration, 37 ; supported by history, 44; 
supported by Scripture, 46. 

Infidelity, cannot be scientific, 255. 

Inquisition, 318. 

Judgment, day of, 132 ; particular, 142. 

Jurisdiction, 143-145; distinguished from honor, 143; of 
the Church, spiritual, 146, 161 ; of the State, tem- 
poral; 147, 148. 

Kneeling, is it wrong except before God, 173-177. 

Latin language, not essential to Catholicity, 337 ; reasons 
for use of, 332 ; why used specially at Mass, 334. 

Laws, human, not the absolute standard of right, 322, 323 ; 
of Church, only for her members, 324 ; of State must 
be obeyed, 147 ; of nature, supposed immutability of, 
254 ; do not regulate free actions, 260. 

Liberty, meaning and value of, 286 ; necessarily dimin- 
ished by knowledge, 288 ; should not prevent instruc- 
tion, 292. 

Marriage, 107, 218 ; after ordination, 246 ; Catholic laws 
about, 321 ; impediments to, 325, 326.- 

Mass or Holy Communion service, 92, 93 ; as a sacrifice, 98. 

Miracles, age of, supposed to have passed, 253 ; at Lourdes, 
267 ; caution of Church regarding, 263 ; not neces- 



iv 



Index. 



sarily contrary to natural laws, 256 ; possible causes 
for, 261 ; predicted as to occur in the Church, 253; 
tests for, 262. 

Misrepresentation of Catholic doctrine, 3, 11, 82, 83, r ii, 

168, 221, 231, 23$, 274. 
Morality, comparative Protestant and Catholic, 350, 351. 
Mortification, Catholic idea of, 210, 211. 

Nestorians, 72. 

Penances, public, 223. 

Persecution, a work of the State rather than of the 
Church, 318; carried farther by Protestants than by 
Catholics, 317, 320; for opinion's sake, true meaning 
of, 310; reasons for, 314. 

Pope, goes to confession, 41, 237 ; interference by, fear of, 
149; supposed secret orders from, 300. 

Prayer, helps to, 167; for the dead, offered by Jews and 
early Christians, 128; intercessory, 170. 

Priests, are men of good character, 113; cannot extort 
money, 127; divided in political questions, 150; laws 
specially applyingto, 219; seldom wealthy, 127; ser- 
vants of the people, 200 ; supposed avarice of, 216. 

Profession of faith, as now made by converts, 63. 

Purgatory, 111. 

Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, 87 ; could 
not have been introduced as an innovation, 97 ; in- 
sisted on by Himself, 89 ; not opposed to physical 
science, 96 ; universally accepted by early Christians, 
90. 

Relics, devotion to, encouraged in Bible, 182; of true 
cross, false ideas about, 183 ; supposed duplication 
of, 184; valued by the world. 180. 

Religion, a matter of fact rather than of emotion, 4, 5 ; evi- 
dences of, 291, 293 ; more important than arithmetic, 
156; must be compatible with reason, 5, 8 ; must be 
scientific, 5 ; possible conflicts with imperfect science, 
38 ; time must be given for it, 1 57. 

Religious liberty ,. 161. 

Religious orders, 249. 



Index. 



v 



Resurrection, of Christ, 70; of the dead, 132 ; what is re- 
quired for it, 135-137. 
Risen body, qualities of it, 140, 141. 

Sacraments, definition of, 102 ; evidence of tradition 
for, 105 ; number of, 101 ; Scripture authority for, 
103 ; tradition regarding, accepted by Protestants, 
105. 

Sacramentals, 270. 

Saints, canonization ot, 265 ; greater power to be expected 

in heaven than on earth, 170-172. 
Salvation, conditions of, 138-140, 269 ; outside the Church, 

191-197 ; through faith alone, 117. 
Sanctification of special days, 203 ; as understood by the 

Church, 206-208 ; made by the Jews, 204. 
Satisfaction, 119, 124. 
Scapulars, 271. 
Schism, 34. 

Science, true and false, 276-280 ; caution of Church re- 
garding latter, 281. 

Second commandment not suppressed by Catholics, 162, 
163. 

Sin, mortal and venial, 114; original, 84. 
Suicide, 309. 

Superstition, condemned by the Church, 272. 

Tradition, 60, 61, 185. 
Transubstantiation, 94. 
Trinity, 67. 

Various grounds taken by sects, 29, 33. 



CATAIvOQUE 

OF THE 

PUBLICATIONS 

OF THE 

CATHOLIC BOOK EXCHANGE, 

120 West 6oth Street, New York. 



The Catholic Book Exchange is a 
Missionary Institution, organized and con- 
trolled by the Paulist Fathers, for the dis- 
semination of Catholic literature. Its ob- 
ject is to distribute as wide-spread as pos- 
sible Books, Pamphlets, and Leaflets at a 
cost which provides simply for current ex- 
penses. Our purpose is to further the 
Apostolate of the Press by the sale of 
printed truth and to put the price of Catho- 
lic books within reach of all. 

The prices quoted in this Catalogue are 
the figures at which the book sells at retail. 

To the Trade and any one buying in quan- 
tities large discounts are offered. 

Special discounts on orders accompanied 
by CASH. 

We prefer to do a Cash business. 



WORKS OF FATHER HECKER. 



CHURCH AND THE AGE : 

An Exposition of the Catholic Church 
in view of the needs and aspirations 
of the present Age. 

322 pages ; paper, 25 cents; cloth, $1,00 
An epoch-making book. It is a book to be read 
and re-read, talked over, and then read again. 
The relations of intelligence and liberty to the 
religious life of the Church are here fully dis- 
cussed. 

ASPIRATIONS OF NATURE. 

360 pages, paper, .20 
Father Hecker in his original way argues himself 
in this work, from a basis which supposes the 
religious instinct, into the Catholic Church, 
where this instinct receives its fullest develop- 
ment. It is a most valuable book to an intel- 
ligent man who has drifted away from all or- 
ganized religion. 

QUESTIONS OF THE SOUL. 

294 pages, paper, .20 
Much that this book contains is a narrative of Father 
Hecker's attempt to solve the problems of life 
outside the Church and his failure to do so, to- 
gether with an enthusiastic and most attractive 
description of how the Catholic Church re- 
vealed God to his thirsting soul. A well-mean- 
ing man will find herein the road to union with 
God. For those who have no positive religion 
this book is very valuable. 

A BRIEF HISTORY OF RELIGION 

from the Creation of the World to the 
Present Time ; to which is % added an 
Historical Sketch of the Catholic 
Church in the United States. 

46 pages, paper, .10 
The study of history is the beaten track leading from 
religious error to Catholic truth. The first part 
of this little work shows the unity and consis- 
tency of God's dealings with men. The second 
nart, from the pen of Father Hecker, is an in- 
vincible argument for Catholic truth drawn 
from its relation to our popular institutions. It 
is valuable as a text-book in Sunday-schools. 



WORKS OF FATHER HEWIT. 



THE TEACHING OF ST. JOHN THE 
APOSTLE to the Churches of 
Asia and the World. 

165 pp., 36 full-page illustrations, cloth, $1.00 

This is a new translation of the writings of St. John 
the Apostle by one of the ablest scholars of the 
day in America, and it offers a specimen of an 
improved English version of the sacred canoni- 
cal Scriptures. The Catholic Hierarchy of this 
day clasps the hand of St. John, on whose head 
rested the hand of the Lord Jesus Christ. 
From this fact, for the present needs of reli- 
gious truth, the writings of St. John acquire 
much of their importance. 

PROBLEMS OF THE AGE: with 
Studies in St. Augustine on Kin- 
dred Topics. 

440 pages, cloth, .75 
This is the best statement in English of some of 
the fundamental questions that lie on the bor- 
derland between natural and revealed reli- 
gions, of original sin and the problem of evil, 
etc. For one who thinks for himself we know 
of nothing better in English. 

Problems of the Age in paper, 287 pages, .25 

Studies in St. Augustine in paper, 155 pages, . 2 5 

THE KING'S HIGHWAY ; 

or y the Catholic Church the Way of 

Salvation as revealed in the Holy 

Scriptures. 

292 pages, cloth, 50 cents ; paper, .25 

It is the Catholic Church proved to be divine from 
the Scriptural argument. First rate in dealing 
with old-fashioned Protestants. 

LIFE OF REV. FRANCIS A. BAKER. 

205 pages, cloth, .75 

Beautiful character sketch of one of the first Paulist 
Fathers, and a charming biography of a convert 
and a missionary. It contains a full history of 
the early beginnings of the Paulists. 



WORKS OF FATHER YOUNG. 



CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT 
COUNTRIES COMPARED in Civil- 
ization, Popular Happiness, Gen- 
eral Intelligence, and Morality; 

636 pages ; paper, 50 cents; cloth, $1.00 
A common argument against the Divinity of the 
Church is : See its demoralizing influence on 
the civilization of Catholic countries. Father 
Young covers the whole field of social ques- 
tions and completely answers all such charges. 
The New York Sun says : " Considering the 
scope of Father Young's book and the extraor- 
dinary amount of research required by it, we do 
not hesitate to pronounce it the strongest piece 
of controversial literature upon the Catholic 
side that has been put forth in recent times." 

CHURCH MUSIC PUBLICATIONS. 

The Catholic Hymnal. Contains 238 
hymns, words and music, appropriate to 
the festivals and seasons of the liturgical 
year, and for special devotions. 8vo, 
boards. In lots of 50 and more, 30 cents 
per copy. Single copy, . 50 

An Order of Divine Praise and 
Prayer A number of prayers and hymns, 
with music, suitable for a congregational 
service. Specimen copies furnished oni/v 
on receipt of 10 cents. 57 pages 24mo, 
paper. Per 100, 3 00 

Carols for a Merry Christmas. 38 
carols, words and music. Stiff cover, 
broad 241110, each, 25 

Carols for a Joyous 1$ aster. 28 charac- 
teristic Kaster Carols, words and music. 
Stiff cover, broad 24mo, each, .25 

Carols for the Mon th of May. 6 carols, 
words and music, in praise of Our Lady. 
Stiff cover, broad 241110, each, .10 

Congregational Singing. How to es- 
tablish it : What to do, and what not to do. 
A brief practical treatise. On receipt of 
1 cents a copy of this treatise and a speci- 
men copy of the Divine Praise and 
Prayer will be sent. Paper, 3 pp. 8vo, .10 



DIVINE ARMORY OF HOLY SCRIP- 
TURE. 

By Rev. Kenelm Vaughan, 
With a Preface by Cardinal Gibbons. 

Leather, five books in one vol., 1,028 pp., $2.00 

It is the Holy Scriptures arranged for devotional 
as well as preaching purposes, for the intelli- 
gent laity as well as for priests. It classifies 
the text of Scripture under appropriate head- 
ings, making an admirably digested Concor- 
dance. We have nothing like it in a Catholic 
English dress. It will serve nicely as a hand- 
book in the revival of Scripture Studies, and 
is coming largely into vogue among intelligent 
lay people as a Prayer- Book of unusual value, 
since it enables one to pray in the words of the 
Holy Ghost. 

GUIDE FOR CATHOLIC YOUNG 
WOMEN, especially for those who 
earn their own living. 
By Rev. George Deshon, Paulist. 

35th edition. 308 pages, cloth, .50 

The peculiar charm of this book is its simple and 
straightforward earnestness. A working-girl's 
whole life is gone over, and the guidance given 
is of a most practical kind and in a most sym- 
pathetic spirit. It is the work of one thor- 
oughly familiar with the spiritual and temporal 
needs of the young working-women of Ameri- 
ca. — Full of common sense and deeply reli- 
gious. The best recommendation the book 
can get is the demand every year for two or 
three new editions. It is particularly useful 
for distribution in Sodalities. 

STORIES OF CONVERSIONS. 

A series of brief but complete Narratives 
of Conversions to the true Faith, written 
in each case by the Convert. 

128 pages, paper, 10 cents ; cloth, ,25 

These are object-lessons of how the grace of God 
leads men and women to Catholicity. They 
are stories of honest inquiry, courageous 
struggle, and great sacrifice, taken from life. 
The charm of personal narrative makes these 
sketches stranger than fiction and far more in- 
teresting. 



PAULIST SERMONS. 



FI\ E MINUTE SERMONS. 

Volume I. New Series. 516 pp., cloth, $1.00 

This volume contains the Gospel and Epistle for 
each Sunday of the year and three well-se- 
lected, practical, and pointed Sermonettes for 
the Low Masses. The advantage of this col- 
lection is that the sermons are by practical 
preachers, have been actually preached, and 
after careful revision are now offered to the 
Clergy. This is an entirely new volume ; the 
sermons have never been published before in 
book-form. It makes an excellent manual for 
use on the altar. 

FIVE MINUTE SERMONS. 

Volumes I. and II., old series, can be supplied at 
$1 each. 

SERMONS PREACHED AT THE 
PAULIST CHURCH 1864, 

476 pages, 1.00 

SERMONS PREACHED 1865-1866. 

440 pages, 1.00 
These sermons comprise a large variety of topics 
and are principally parochial in their treatment. 

SERMONS OF REV. FRANCIS A. 
BAKER, PAULIST. 

297 pages, .50 

Father Baker was one of the most attractive 
preachers of the Church, and this collection 
of his sermons has been eagerly sought for 
on account of their special charm. 



MISSION HYMNS WITH MUSIC. 

32 pages, paper, 5 cents ; per 100, $3.00 

These hymns are arranged for use of the people in 
congregational singing. 

MISSION HYMNS WITHOUT MUSIC. 

Same as above. Single copy, 3 cts.; per ioo 1.00 



PRAYER BOOKS. 



THE MANUAL OF PRAYERS. 

The intelligent laity are demanding a prayer book 
which will serve them in their devotions. The 
Bishops of the Plenary Council of Baltimore 
directed that such a book be prepared. The 
Manual of Prayers is the outcome of this 
direction. It sells at various prices according 
to binding. Write for prices. 

THE MASS BOOK ; with Prayers use- 
ful in Catholic Devotion and Ex- 
planations of Catholic Doctrines. 

64 pages, flexible cover, .05 
This is a prayer book for the million. It has all 
the necessary prayers. It has, moreover, lucid 
explanations adapted even to the most simple. 
This is the book to buy in quantities and give 
away to the hundreds who cannot afford to 
possess high-priced prayer books. 

MASS-BOOK FOR NON-CATHOLICS. 

Compiled by a Convert. 

75 pages, paper, .10 
Often non-Catholics come into the Church at fu- 
nerals, great festivals, or to hear a sermon. 
The Mass is an enigma to them. This little 
book is a guide to the Mass. The idea is to 
have a supply of these little books at the door 
and have the usher place one in the hands of 
each non-Catholic. 

CHRISTIAN UNITY. 

By Rev. Morgan M. Sheedy. 

120 pages ; paper, i cents ; cloth, .50 
A new book on one of the most attractive topics 
of the day. The days of theological scalping 
have gone by. The best minds are eagerly 
discussing the Reunion of Christendom. 
Father Sheedy in his clear, incisive way sug- 
gests a new way to Christian Unity. 

EUCHARISTIC CONFERENCES. 

231 pages, Illustrated, cloth, .50 
These are a series of thoughtful and very well pre- 
pared papers originally read at the first Ameri- 
can Eucharistic Congress. They cover many 
phases of Eucharistic devotion and thought. 



Sixty-five leaflets. 

4 pp. tracts, 25 cts. per 1 00 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 8 pp., 50 cts. 
nerlOO; $5 per 1,000. 12 pp., 60 cts. per 100 ; $6 per 1,000 

RELIGIOUS INDIFFERENTISM AND ITS 
REMEDY. To refute the objection, One religion is as 
good as another. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

THE PLEA OF SINCERITY. Truth in itself the ob- 
ject of investigation. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

THE NIGHT BEFORE THE FORLORN HOPE; 
or, Prayer a Resource in all Danger. 4 pp. 25 cts. 
per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 

WHAT SHALL I DO TO BE SAVED ? 8 pp. $5 
per 1,000. 

THE PLEA OF UNCERTAINTY. Truth for all men 
is one ; there can be no uncertainty. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

WHAT MY UNCLE SAID ABOUT THE POPE. 
Who is to interpret the Bible, the fallible individual or 
the infallible Church ? 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

HOW SHALL WE FIND TRUE CHRISTIANITY ? 
The Church teaching with divine authority is the rule of 
faith. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

CATHOLIC TRADITION. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100; 
$2.50 per 1,000. 

WHAT IS TO BE DONE IN SUCH A CASE ? 
Intemperance in the family. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 
per 1,000. 

THE SENATORS OF SHERBURN ; or, A Law- 
yer's Rule of Faith. The Church or the Bible ? 8 
pp. $5 per 1,000. 

THE REAL PRESENCE OF CHRIST IN THE 
EUCHARIST. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

A CONVERSATION ON UNION AMONG CHRIS- 
TIANS. The principle of unity is submission to lawful 
constituted authority. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

THE GOSPEL DOOR OF MERCY. How sins are 
forgiven. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

WHAT SHALL I DO TO BECOME A CHRIS- 
TIAN ? Believe right and do right. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

A VOICE IN THE NIGHT ; or, Lessons in the 
Sick-Room. Sickness a messenger of God to convert the 
sinner. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

THE GOSPEL CHURCH. (1) An authoritatively 
teaching Church. (2) A sacramental Church. (3) A 
sacrificing Church. 12 pp. $6 per 1,000. 

WHO IS JESUS CHRIST ? The divinity of our 
Lord proved from Scripture, history, and civilization . 12 
pp. $6 per 1,000. 

THE TRINITY. Its reasonableness. The proof of 
its revelation. 12 pp. $6 per 1,000. 

HEROISM IN THE SICK-ROOM. 4 pp. 25 cts. 
per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 



IS THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS OF HUMAN 
OR DIVINE INSTITUTION ? 8 pp., $5 per 1,000. 

WHY DID GOD BECOME MAN ? Scotist doctrine. 
8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

WHO FOUNDED THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ? 
4 pp. 25 cents per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 

EXCLUSIVENESS OF THE CATHOLIC 
CHURCH. Explanation of " out of the Church there is 
no salvation." 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100^ $2 50 per 1,000. 

HOW TO KEEP LENT. What is meant by prayer 
and fasting. 8 pp. $2.50 per 1,000. 

IS IT HONEST ? Controversial. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 
100; $2.50 per 1,000. 

WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY ? Controversial. 
The Church and the Sacraments. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; 
$2.50 per 1,000. 

THE RELIGION I WANT. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; 
$2.50 per 1,000. 

HOW TO HAVE A HAPPY CHRISTMAS. A good 
Confession is the best remedy for the blues. 8 pp. $5 
per 1,000. 

HOW'S THAT ? Short explanations of Catholic doc- 
trines and practices. Nos. I. and II. 4 pp. each. 25 cts. 
per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 

WHAT THINK YE OF MARY ? WHOSE MO- 
THER IS SHE ? 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

CONVERTED BY AN INFIDEL. 4pp. 25 cts. per 
100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

POPERY AND THE APOSTLES ; or, The Biter 
Bit. The Church of to-day is the same as the Church of 
the Apostles. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1.000. 

THE LOVE OF JESUS CHRIST. We love Him be- 
cause He loves us. Because of His benefits. Because He 
has given Himself to us. Because our future depends on 
Him. a. pp. 25 cts. per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 

THE POPE'S TEMPORAL POWER. What it 
means. Why he must be independent. Objections and 
answers. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

A SHORT READING FOR THE SICK. (1) Patience 
in pain. (2) Temptations of the sick. (3) Submit to 
God's will. (4) Flope for special help at the hour of 
death. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

IS IT TRUE ? The Bible myths of Protestants. The 
story about Latin in the Church. That our religion is all 
ceremony. That it is false because of bad popes or 
priests. That confession increases sin. That only ignor- 
ant Catholics are sincere. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 
per 1,000. 

BE SURE YOU ARE RIGHT AND THEN GO 
AHEAD. Questions of Protestants about our faith and 
practice answered. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

PROGRESS IN RELIGION. The teaching Church 
decides our faith for us. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2. «c per 
1,000. 



HOW TO GET MARRIED. Do not marry a Pro- 
testant ; marry a Catholic with Banns, Confession, Mass, 
and Holy Communion. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100; $2.50 
per 1,000. 

HOW TO DIE. Prepare : (1) By a good life. (2) 
By receiving the last Sacraments before half dead. 4 pp. 
25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

SALLY BRANCH. The old Church: a narrative of 
a conversion. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

SOMETHING ABOUT INDULGENCES. How t o 
gain them. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

HOW TO FIND THE TRUE RELIGION. The 
Church, not the Bible alone. Historical. 4 pp. 25 cts. 
per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 

SAINT WORSHIP. "The one mediator." 4 pp. 
25 cts. per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 

SAINT WORSHIP. The invocation of saints ex- 
plained. How they hear us, etc. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; 
$2.50 per 1,000. 

THE LAST OF THE POPE. A short history of the 
persecutions of the Papacy. Fallacies of Protestants ex- 
posed. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 

BAPTISM. Its necessity. Effect. The minister. The 
ceremonies, etc. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

HOW TO MAKE A GOOD CONFESSION. An 
excellent Mission instruction. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; 
$2.50 per 1,000. 

DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART OF JE- 
SUS. Its history. The theology of it. 4 pp. 25 cts. 
per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

NO SECT IN HEAVEN. If there are no sects in 
Heaven, there should be none on earth. 4 pp. 25 cts. 
per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

THE SACRAMENT OF CONFIRMATION. 4 pp. 
25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

DEVOTION TO THE ANGELS. 4 pp. 25 cts. 
per 100; $2.50 per 1,000. 

TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE. What some Protest- 
ants say about our perfect Church. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 
100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

PURGATORY AND PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD. 
8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

A PASTOR'S PLAIN TALK TO HIS PEOPLE. 
Duties of the people to their parish Church. 4 pp. 25 
cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

WHAT DO CATHOLICS BELIEVE ? Brief Ex- 
position of the doctrines taught by the Church. 4 pp. 
25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

WHAT CATHOLICS DO NOT BELIEVE. 4 pp. 
25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

WHY I AM A CATHOLIC. 8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 

SHALL OUR CHILDREN BE CHRISTIANS ? On 
education. 4 pp. 25 cts. per 100 ; $2.50 per 1,000. 

THE USE OF THE BIBLE AMONG THE LAITY. 
8 pp. $5 per 1,000. 



PERIODICALS. 



TIib Catfiolio World fflaoazinB. 

EDITED BY THE PAULIST FATHERS. 

An Illustrated Magazine of General Literature. 

ISSUED EVERY MONTH. 

S3 per Year. 1 20 West 60th Street, New York. 

The Catholic World Magazine is the old-estab- 
lished representative organ of Catholic thought. For 
thirty years it has led in the development of intellectual 
life by its able, advanced, and aggressive methods. 
Lately by its beautiful illustrations, its more popular tone, 
its reduced price, and its bright, entertaining " get up," it 
has more than doubled its subscription list. 

We give very large discounts to Agents in 
every city, and ladies as well as men can make 
good salaries. Write for terms. 



THE YOUNG CATHOLIC. 

x6 Pages. Every Two Weeks. 

BEAUTIFULLY ILLUSTRATED. 

A Wonderful Help in the Sunday-School. 
Single copy, $1 per Year. 1 20 West 60th Street, New York. 

In quantities for Sunday-Schools at 2 cents a copy. 

A bright little magazine distributed every second Sun- 
day will secure better attendance, enliven the interest in 
Sunday-School work and be a valuable auxiliary in edu- 
cating the children. 

New Methods. New Results. New Successes. 



THE MISSIONARY: 

A Record of Christian Unity. 

The organ of the non-Catholic Mission Movement. 

Published every 3 Months. Subscription price $1 per Year. 

It represents the Catholic Missionary Union, a society 
legally incorporated for the purpose of gathering funds to 
support missionaries who are engaged in giving missions 
in sections of the country where the people are almost en- 
tirely non-Catholic. 

Address: The Missionary, 120 West 60th Street, New York, 



OCT 25 1901 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Jan. 2006 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 1 6066 
{724) 779-2111 



(3 



